
Glass 



Book__i_£Z 



•/\,N^ 



COLONIAL HIGHWAYS 

OF 

GREATER NEW YORK 

A DISCUSSION OF THE PRESENT 
INTEREST OF THE CITY THEREIN 



REPORTS 



OF 



Herman A. MeTZ, Comptroller 



TO 



Commissioners of the Sinking Fund 
1907-1908 



CITY OF NEW YORK 

BUREAU FOR THE EXAMINATION OF CLAIMS 

DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE 



COLONIAL HIGHWAYS 



OF 



GREATER NEW YORK , a^r^j^^^r^UM^ 



A DISCUSSION OF THE PRESENT 
INTEREST OF THE CITY THEREIN 



REPORTS 



OF 



Herman A. MeTZ. Comptroller 



TO 



Commissioners of the Sinking Fund 
1907-1908 



CITY OF NEW YORK 

BUREAU FOR THE EXAMINATION OF CLAIMS 

DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE 



MARTIN R. BROWN 




NEWXTiDRK 




a 



z 



o 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 



Certificate of De Witt Clinton 3 

Introduction, Herman A. Metz 7-9 

Preface, Robert B. Jordan lo-i i 

B. 

Bennetts or Cortelyou Lane, with Map 13-13 

Bennetts or Van Brunts Lane, with !Map 17-21 

Boston Post Road, with Map 23-39 

Brooklyn, Greenwood and Bath Plank Road, with Map 41-45 

Brooklyn, Jamaica and Flatbush Turnpike, with Map 47-63 

Bushwick Road, with Map 65-69 

C. 

Church Lane or East Broadway, with Map 71-/5 

Clove Road, with Map ^^-^'i 

D. 

De Bruyns Lane, with Map 81-S3 

G. 

Gowanus Road, with Map 85-89 

H. 

Hunterfly Road, with Map 91-101 

K. 

Kings Highway, with Map 103- 115 

Kingsbridge Road, with Map 1 17-143 

Kyckout Road, with Map 145-151 

L. 

Lotts or Little Lane, with Map 153-155 

N. 

Newtown and Bushwick Turnpike, with Map 157-161 

w. 

Woodpoint Road, with Map 163-165 



Colonial Highways of Greater New York. 



MEMORANDUM. 

City of Xew York — Departmext of Fixance,! 
Comptroller's Office, 

August 1, 1908. J 

The matters ^\■llicll come before the De])artment of Finance 
of The City of Xew York are almost as varied as the whims of 
men and the caprice of legislatures can suggest. A great deal 
of the work is technical, much of it dry, and therefore not par- 
ticularly interesting to the ])ublic in a joiu'nalistic sense. Should 
the public eye follow the columns of the City Record there would 
doubtless appear many things that would not be clear in the public 
mind. It might, for example, ^^•on(ler why the City should em- 
ploy somebody to delve into the history of forgotten centuries and 
endeavor to trace the origin of old roads. Therefore, a word of 
explanation seems necessary. 

As a legal proposition, speaking generally, all the roads laid 
out by the Dutch during their sovereignty here were owned in 
fee by the government. The City of Xew York, as successor to 
that government, therefore, owns the fee of such roads unless the 
ownership has been conveyed. On the other hand it is held by 
some able lawyers that the government did not as a rule own the 
fee of English roads, but enjoyed only an easement for road pur- 
poses, a reversionary interest remaining in the adjoining owners 
on either side. There are many ramifications of the question, but 
this is, in rough, a general outline of the legal views of the matter. 



It should ])v added, liowever, that there is able legal ()|)iiii()ii w liic-h 
does not acce|)t tiii' view expresst'd as to English roads without 
very material (lualitieatioris. 

As the City has grown new streets have been extended into 
territory travei-sed by the old roads, and the usefulness of the old 
roads as highways has, in many eases, eeased. In other instances 
they have been made a ))ai-t of the ])resent street system. T^jjon 
the abandonment of the old roads it ajjjiears that the lands in- 
cluded within their lines were fretjuently a|)])ro])i-iated to pri\ate 
uses. 

In late years \\hen the holder of sueh a parcel has sought to 
borrow on his land, (juestion has been raised by title companies 
and other conveyancers as to the ownership of the old roads. 
After such objection it became customary to file a petition with the 
Commissioners of the Sinking Fund reciting that the City had 
no substantial interest in the road but might have some right 
whieh would constitute a cloud on the title to the ])ro])erty. The 
petition would then pray for a release of the ])ublie interest. 

The reports pre])ared for the Cor])oration Counsel usually 
amounted to a remodeling of the statements of the petition, with 
no new facts to show what interest the City really did have. On 
such reports the Corporation Counsel customai'ily rendered opin- 
ions that the interest of the City was merely nominal and a re- 
lease of the City's interest was granted for $1, with SjilOU added 
for the expense of investigation. The properties varied in size, 
but many were of considerable area. 

It did not seem to me that the interests of the City were 
projjerly jjrotected and an investigation was ordered. If it could 
be shown that roads were of Dutch origin an important advantage 
coidd be gained. That is why the City delved into the i)ast. The 



9 

results so far luive been o-ratifying'. With facts before him the 
Corporation Counsel has swept aside the old stereotyped form of 
opinion showing a nominal interest in the City, and has held in 
several cases that the City has a material interest in these old 
roads. 

The investigation has naturally been attended b^' much 
difficidty and considerable delay, but most of the principal roads 
have now been covered, and in futiu'c the work will ];)rogress more 
rapidly. 

The investigation has also made it apparent that the City 

should take some definite steps toward reclaiming its old records. 

JMatters of modern moment are often dependent upon some 

ancient instnmient, and care should be taken to preserve the old 

documents, because they can never be du])licated or i-eplaced if 

lost. 

H. A. Metz, Comptroller. 



lO 



Bxnnur fou the Kxa:\iixati()x of Claims, ] 

City of Xkw Vokk — Dki'akt.mkxt of Fixaxce, [ 

July H. 1908. J 
Hon. TTkuman A. Mktz. ('(un jilrollcr: 

Sir — 111 accordance with your (lirfftiou I have collected the 
old road reports and present them for ])uhlication in convenient 
form for the use of the I^aw Department and others who may have 
occasion to refer to them. 

This collection does not attempt to embrace all the old roads 
that laced the settlements in the early days. ^Vithin the borders 
of Kings County alone there were eighty-six roads Mhich in the 
course of time may have to be reported ujjon. In this work, 
however, the investigation has been directed to those roads in 
which the interest of the City is most frequently sought to be re- 
leased. Those that have been treated are of major importance 
and \\\u\v it would hardly be correct to refer to others as of minor 
importance, the determination of the interest of the City being 
in all cases of e(iual value. I bt-lieve that a final determination of 
the character of these roads will facilitate the finding of the ])ublic 
interest in the class of cases ai-isiiig most frequently. 

J am under obligations to many persons for courtesies show^n 
me in the course of this investigation, but I desire especially to 
make acknowledgment to the attaches of the office of the Com- 
missioner of Records in Kings County by whom unvarying 
courtesy has been extended throughout the examination. 

I am, however, most deeply indebted to you for the aggTes- 
sive support without which the entire undertaking wovdd ])rob- 
ably have failed. I desire to say that if any benefit accrues to the 
City I'rom the r(|)orts that T have had the i)leasvn"e to write, that 
benefit is due diivetlv to vou. When vou instructed me to take 



II 

up this matter, you were good enough to repose entire confidence 
in nie. Apart from that fact the search was luidertaken under 
most discouraging conditions, for the move was not a ])opular one, 
I have to thank you for the generous manner in whicli you have 
supported me in every dispute, for the close personal interest with 
which you have followed my investigation and the unwavering 
course you have ])ursued in jjrotecting the interests of the City. 

I feel that discussion of this suhject would be incom])lete 
without extending my thanks to the Hon. N. Taylor Phillips, 
Deputy Comptroller, whose wide knowledge of the legal aspects 
of the subject has always been o])en to me and whose advice has 
ever been cheerfully and readily given. 

The maps which accompany these reports are intended merely 
to show the general location and direction of the various roads 
and they do not ])in-port to be drawn to any scale showing the 
relative width of sti-eets and roads. The maps showing the Kings- 
bridge and Boston Post Roads are taken from the original Com- 
missioner's map of 1811. In this it will be noticed that the Kings- 
bridge and Boston Post Roads ajJi^ear to be the same in certain 
sections. Both seem to have been names ap])lied to the ancient 
road known as early as 1(369 as the Road to Harlem. It will be 
found that many old roads are very much older than their jjopu- 

lar names. 

Respectfully, 

Robert Jordan, Examiner. 
Approved : 

F. J. Priai,, Chief Examiner. 



13 
BENNETTS OR CORTELYOU LANE. 

Length, 7-10 of a Mile. Intersects 7 Blocks. 

Bennetts lane is one o£ the oldest roads in Brooklyn. It was used by the Dutch 
during the period of their occupation here, and has been used as a highway since those 
days. It extends from the Kings Highway to Gravcsend Baj', a short distance west of 
De Bruyns lane. 

During the Dutch occupation a patent for land lying at the intersection of King, 
Highway and Bennetts lane was issued to one De Sille. While the roads were not 
then known by those names, the boundaries of the patent have been located and the 
identity of the roads established. The records of New Utrecht under date of January 
22, i66o, refer to Bennetts lane as the Shore road. 

Another evidence that Bennetts lane is a Dutch road may be gathered from a 
brief reference to tlie circumstances attending the surrender of New Amsterdam. The 
expedition sent out by the Duke of York to occupy the territory granted to him by 
Charles II. was carried in four ships of war which the King loaned for the enter- 
prise. The expedition landed at Boston in order to give color to a fiction emanating 
from the Crown that the purpose of the affair was to look after certain religious 
matters in Massachusetts. 

Colonel Nicols, who commanded the fleet, detached two ships and sailed for New 
Amsterdam, where he caused it to become known that while the Duke of York wanted 
the title to New Netherland, he was willing to let the Dutch continue in the enjoyment 
of customs and property. The Dutch rule had become irksome to the settlers and they 
were secretly glad to change rulers, so long as their private affairs were not dis- 
turbed. 

Hence, when Governor Stuyvesant appealed to the Dutch towns on Long Island 
for help, thej' declined to grow enthusiastic, and Stuyvesant was compelled to look 
elsewhere. All of the foregoing may appear foreign to the subject of Bennetts lane, 
but the connecting link is here. 

While Nicols was in Boston he arranged to have a detachment of English troops 
march down and rest at the Ferry Settlement (Fulton Ferry) in Brooklyn. Upon 
Stuyvesant's refusal to surrender, Nicols withdrew his ships to Gravesend Bay, and 
there landed a detachment, which marched up and joined the force at the ferry. There 
were at that time two roads connecting the bay with the main road or Kings high- 
way at the points where the e.'cpeditions would be most likely to land. One was Ben- 
netts lane and the other De Bruyns lane. By using Bennetts lane, the march might 
have included a peaceful demonstration in the town of New Utrecht, and would have 
placed the troops in a position to strengthen any wavering settlers in the towns in- 
tervening between that point and the ferry. 



'4 

Under authority of a resolution adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Kings 
County on December 27, 1892, Sixteenth avenue was opened from Eighty-fourth street 
to Gravesend Bay. A part of this street was within the hues of Bennetts lane and 
part was not. witli tlie result th;it in certain sections, a strip of Bennetts lane inter- 
venes between the line of Si.xtcenth avenue and the property of abutting owners. On 
May 4, 1906, the Board of Estimate and Apportionment adopted a resolution closing 
Bennetts lane from Eighty-fourth street to (iravescnd Bay. Since tlien several appli- 
cations for releases of the intervening strip have been filed. 

In the proceeding for the opening of Sixteenth avenue, as shown by papers on 
fde in the County Clerk's office, the owners of property so situated received no award 
for damage, because none of their property was taken, but, on the other hand, the 
Commissioners took into consideration that owners on the northeast side of Sixteenth 
avenue (where the strip is) were not benelited to the same extent as those on the 
other side, so the portion of the assessment that would logically have been levied on 
property within the lines of Bennetts lane was distributed over the whole area of 
assessment. This arrangement was considered by the Commissioners to be the most 
equitable way of distributing the assessment, according to an affidavit made by 
Douglas Gubner, one of the Commissioners, on February 12, 1S94, which is on file 
with the papers of the proceeding in the office of the County Clerk of Kings County. 

Certain owners on the northeast side of the lane claim that they are entitled to 
either a frontage on Sixteenth avenue or to damages for the closing of Bennetts lane. 
Whether the action of the Commissioners in relieving such owners of a portion of 
the assessment may be regarded as sufficient to overcome this objection is a legal 
question that should be referred to the Corporation Counsel. 



Department of Finance, Bureau tor ll:e Kxamination of Cairns. 



SROOKLVN CBRerCNVWOOOj 
0< B/VTM F'LA.MW. I=<.0 



« WOOOJ 



NETVN' LfrWECHT TO F-l.*>TDUSH. 

^:^ II iL 




BEIMNETTS 
CO ^TElVou L.A.NE 



BENNETTS OR VAN BRUNTS LANE. 

Length, 5-10 of a Mile. Intersects Five Blocks. 

Some confusion has been created because there is another Bennetts lane at no 
great distance from this — that other lane is known as Bennetts or Cortelyous. It ex- 
tended from the Kings Highway to Gravesend Bay. Bennetts or Van Brunts lane, 
which is now under consideraticn, connected the main road with the upper bay, and ran 
through the section now included between Seventy-seventh and Eightieth streets, in 
Brooklyn. 

The first authentic reference that the Experts of Commissioner of Records in 
Kings County have found to this lane is in the Road Record of 1704, where the lane 
is referred to as "One Common Highway." This was long after the Dutch Sovereignty 
had ended, and so, according to records thus far at hand, this lane would come under 
the designation of an English road as distinguished irom Dutch. 

It is held by able legal opinions that while the fee of a Dutch road remains in the 
City, unless it has been conveyed by proper authority, there is a reversionary interest 
accruing to owners abutting on an English road, and that the public exercises an ease- 
ment, but does not possess the fee. 

From what I have been able to gather it appears that this opinion is based on the 
theory that, as the land for the highway had to be taken from somewhere, the pre- 
sumption is that it was carved out of the lands which subsequently abutted upon it, and, 
therefore, when its life as a road or highway ended it reverted again to those from 
whom it was supposed to have been taken. 

Land must be owned, but it must not necessarily be owned by individuals. Thus 
it does not always follow that a present abutting owner is the successor in title of 
some individual whose land was taken for a road or a highway under such conditions 
that a reversionan,- interest would attach. In very early days when the country was 
rough and wild, individuals gathered in more or less isolated conmiunities, between 
which were wide stretches of primitive country. Yet the very necessity for communi- 
cation between such points created reads. Who were the abutting owners along 
these? This condition is referred to by the Court of Appeals (Dunham vs. WilHams, 
yj N. Y., 253), in an opinion regarding the ownership of the road leading from Flat- 
bush and Jamaica to the Brooklyn Ferry — the Court referring to the road, said: 
"It was laid out before the settlement of the intermediate lands, and when there were 
no adjacent proprietors." 

From the nature of the case and the discussion preceding this extract it is evident 
that tlie Court referred to adjacent owners in the individual sense. If there were none 
of these, it seems reasonable to assume that the adjoining lands, wliich had to be owned 
by some authority, were the property of the government. 



iS 

It is true that the road referred to there was a Dutch road. Imt tlie point regard- 
ing the possibility of tlicre being no adjoining proprietors of an incHvidual character 
seems to apply with equal force to cither period, he it Englisli or Dutch. 

Dn tliis point the opinions of Justice Murray Hoffman, as expressed in his 
''Treatise on the Estates and Rights of the Corporation," are of special value. It is 
oidy necessary to say that Judge Hoffman's work is accepted and quoted as authority 
by the Court of Appeals (.Dmihani vs. Williams). 

Ill the second edition of tin- work, published in iWu, Jud.ne llolTman discusses the 
title of streets in Section XI. In this the author divides the history of tlie acquisition 
of any estate or power relating to streets into four periods: First, from the settlement 
of the City to the surrender in 1664; second, from 1664 to the Charter of 1686, and the 
Colonial Act of October, 1691 ; third, from that date to the great street system of 
1807 and the statute of 1813, laying out streets, etc., and fourth, from that time to the 
present. 

From a careful examination of the facts and law relating to the first period, he 
concluded that two propositions may be sustained. First, that the absolute right and 
title to the soil occupied as a street prior to 1664 vested in the government and came 
down to the Corporation of The City of X^pw York. 

This second conclusion is this: P. .^03. 

"That an estate in fee to the soil of any street opened after 1664, and opened 
through lands comprised in a grant of the Dutch government made before tliat date, 
has become in like manner \csted in the corporation. That it is so vested wdiether 
such street was opened by public authority, with or without compensation to the owner; 
and also wdiether the street was first laid out as a private w;iy and afterward accepted 
as a public street, or was originally laid out as a public street. I regard this rule as 
applying to every street laid out. down to the year 1813." 

The author in discussing his second proposition in more detail, says: Page 312: 
"I have before shown that the ground briefs were valid sources of title, even with- 
out an Knglish contirmation. The lands covered by such briefs were granted and 
held at the period of the surrender, subject to the right of the public authority to lay 
out streets through them, with or without compensation, and were held subject to the 
settled rule that where streets wd'e so laid out, the fee in the soil passed to the gov- 
ernment. The English .succeeded to the public rights of tlie Dutch. I cannot conceive a 
just reason for supposing that this substitution clianged the character of the tenure in 
this particular. Admit to its utmost extent the doctrine of the Englisli publicists that 
the surrender was a restoration and not a conquest, and that the whole legal conse- 
quences of a title by discovery attached to the colony, yet indisputably the right of 
property under Dutch grants was saved and guaranteed by the article of surrender re- 
ferred to, and as every essential estate and right of the grantee remained unimpaired 
and the same, so every condition or burthen attendant upon that estate continued un- 
changed. 



19 

"I regard it as a necessarj- conclusion, that grantees were to hold thereafter, with 
the same public servitudes, because they were to hold with the same rights. 

"I submit then that it is established that the fee to every street opened at any 
time after the surrender and opened through land comprised in a Dutch ground brief 
vested in the then existing government or its grantees, unless a dit¥erent rule has been 
established by express law. None such. I am jiersuaded, can be found." Page 313. 

On November 22, 1652, the Indians conveyed to Cornelis Van VVerckhoven a large 
tract of land in the New Utrecht section. The land conveyed in that transaction em- 
braced the land through which l!ennctts lane was made at a later date. 

Van Werckhoven returned to Holland to perfect plans for settling the tract, and 
died there. On January 16, 1658, the successors of Van Werckhoven applied to and 
received from Governor Stuyvcsant permission to found a town. Confirmations of this 
were issued by Governor Nicolls on August 15, 1668, and by Governor Dongan on 
May 13, i6?6. 

On May 29, 1903, the Board of Estimate and -Appiirtionment adopted a reso- 
lution, approved by the Mayor June 17, 1903. closing all parts of Bennetts or Van Brunts- 
lane, between Third avenue and Shore road, not included in Seventy-ninth street. 

The questions raised by Justice Hoffman are introduced here because this is the first 
English road that has developed during the investigation of the subject. The conten- 
tions of the learned judge involve legal questions of an important nature, and I would 
therefore suggest that applications for releases along Bennetts or Van Brunts lane be 
referred to the Law Department. 



Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination of C'aims. 



NNET-TTS OR V/VN SRUMTS L /V> hj E 




B EN N ETTA 
VAN ©"runts 



OLD BOSTON POST ROAD. 

Permit me to state in the beginning that this report is not as thorough as I would 
desire to have it, but the condition of the old records is such that a prolonged search 
will be necessary before complete satisfaction can be approximated. 

This road was first known as the wagon road between New York and Harlem. 
The records of New Amsterdam, volume 6, page 359, under date of 1671, contain the 
following : 

"The Court do empower Mr. Cornelis Van Ruyven and Mr. Jsaacq Bedloo, Alder- 
men, to cause the former orders in making of a good Waggon path betwi.xt this Citty 
and the Town of harlem to be put into strict execution, whereof an Ample Order shall 
be given unto them." 

At page 361 this statement is printed : 

"Whereas the Honble. General has at divers times recommended to this Court and 
this W. Court has ordered the Overseers as well of Haerlem as the suburbs hereabout 
to construct the road between, this place and Haerlem, notwithstanding which it is 
still found unfinished, for which reason tii.any complaints have been lodged — yea, that 
people wishing lately to travel over that road on horseback have been in danger of 
losing their lives by the neglectful keeping of the said road; which together with other 
reasons iias moved the Honorable General to earnestly recommend to us again the con- 
struction of the aforesaid road, in order that then the work may be promptly Com- 
menced and Executed. Therefore, as for the prosecution of so necessary a work, the 
W. Court cannot hit on a better expedient than to commission two from their Bench 
of Justice, as they hereby do. to summon as often as they shall think fit touching that 
work. The overseers as well of Haerlem as the suburbs dwelling hereabout, and do 
propose to them in the first place, how very ill it has been taken, that the previous 
orders regarding the aforesaid road have not beer, better observed: Secondly, the 
earnest intention of the Honnble. General and this W. Court, that such should forthwith, 
without any neglect, be executed : which being done, to provide means how and in what 
manner such should' not only be completed, but also kept continually in good repair; 
and, in our opinion it would not be improper to make the Overseers of the suburbs 
hereabout Supervi.sors of the part those of Haerlem shall have to maintain, and the 
overseers of Haerlem Supervisors of the part of Suburbs hereabout nnist keep in 
repair: and for the prosecution of the aforesaid are requested and appointed 

Alderman Cornelis Van Ruyven 
Isaacq Bedloo 
Who are hereby specialty authorized with the Overseers to impose such fines on those 
who, when summoned, shall neglect to appear or to send anyone, and to apply the 
same as they shall deem proper for the ad\-antage of the aforesaid. Thus done at the 



24 

Meeting of the Worship Mayors Court in tlio Cily Hall of the City of New York tliis 
Ijtli February." 

It will he noticed that wliilc this official action bears date of 1671. it is recorded 
that the Honorable General had at d'vi-rs times recommended the inii)rovement of the 
road and that part of the road- had been started and remained nnfini-hed. all of which 
shows that the road was in existence at an earlier period 

Judge James \V. (ierard, wdiose works on titles to real estate arc regarded as 
standard authority, makes the following statement regarding the road from New York 
to Harlem at page 303 of his work on the water rights, title to streets, etc., of the 
corporation of The City of New York : 

"Commissioners appointed in i66q, 1671, 1672, to lay out a wagon road between 
New York and Harlem. In 1679 a return w'as made stating that they had staked out 
the highway and appraised the land' taken at 20 guilders per rood. 

"This road branched off the Kingsbridge road just after the latter crossed Turtle 
Creek for the second time. T. crossed the present Harlem Bridge and was also called 
the Boston Post road; afterward the whole of the road from Twenty-third street to 
Harlem was known by that name." 

Although all the dates are after the surrender of the Dutch, the references indicate 
an earlier e.^istence of the road. It will also be noticed that the Commissioners who 
were appointed made awards for the lands taken, so it becomes an interesting question 
whether these proceedings did not of themselves vest a fee in the government of which 
The City of New York is successor. 

Beginning in 1790, this road became identified with a series of legislative acts 
which indicate that it was paid for by public taxation. Chapter 37 of the Laws of 1790 
authorized Lewis Morris to construct a bridge from Harlem to Morrisania. The Com- 
missioners of Highways were authorized to lay out a convenient road from any part 
of the main road leadint^ from The City of New York to Harlem River at the bridge 
then authorized'. Commissioners were appointed to lay out a road four rods in width 
from the bridge through the Towns of Morrisania, Westchester and Eastchester until 
it should strike the main road in Eastchester. 

Morris assigned the grant to John B. Coles on March 25, 1795. Coles secured 
permission of the Legislature to construct a dam across the Harlem River to impound 
water for the use of mills. This act also provided for the completion of the bridge 
within fo\ir years: that Coles and his heirs should keep the bridge in repair for sixty 
years, after which it should vest in the people of the State (chapter 31, Laws 1795). 

It appears that the bridge was built and part of the road laid out, but awards were 
not paid for the lands taken. In 1707 the Legislature directed that the road he estab- 
lished as a public highway. Coles was authorized to collect additional toll for thirty 
years and he was to keep the road in repair (chapter 63, Laws 1797). The year 
following Coles was relieved of some of his responsibilities and his tolls cut down 
(chapter 74, Laws 1795). 



25 

In 1797 an act was passed providing for the improvement of several roads, and the 
road from Coles Bridge to Eastchester was one of them. The money to meet these 
improvements was raised by a lottery authorized by the Legislature in 1797. In 1808 
the Legislature incorporated Coles and his associates under the name of the "Harlem 
Bridge. Company.'' In 1857 the Legislature passed an act reciting the fact that on 
April I, 1858, it was to become a free bridge, to be maintained by the Counties of New 
York and Westchester. 

It would seem from the act of 1790 that the intention was to have the towns bear 
the expense of laying out the road. It is contended, however, that such awards were 
not paid. The lottery, however, authorized in 1797 would also seem to indicate that 
the public bore the expense of improving the road. 

Whether, in view of all these circumstances. The City of New York as successor 
of the various towns, acquired a fee or merely an easement in the road is a question 
which should be referred to the Corporation Counsel for an examination of the various 
acts relating to the matter. 



Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Claims 




JJOSTOX POST ROAD. 



Department o£ Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Claims. 









-^-\^^ 



^1^- - .■ I gjjlgi:t»iii i<!,JiarlicSa^ ''|'-'' 






'^ga'i'nc c n r £^^^ 



ir '! 



UL-: 








' I i ..•,?, --"rk. \ 



i.L 



tliniLZ 





1'—! 



r^cn 



M 



-y?n. 



Z33z 



Ft 



jl-JLjljlJL^ 





m 



airr^Tm^ 






/ti-zA: 







BOSTON POST ROAD. 



Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination r:i Clain 












L ~;, . 




■-V-- 




















/ 




1 


f^ 








1 






.)' ' 








/'j- 


.IV,-- , 



BOSTON POST ROAD. 



l")(_I)arlnicnt L-f I-'mkhilc. Hurcau fnv tlie Examination of Claims. 




KINGSBRIDGE ROAD— BOSTON POST R(.)AL). 



Department of Finance. Bureau for the Examination of Claims. 




KING.SBRIDGE ROAD— BOSTON PO.-^T K(i.\D. 



Department uf Finance, Eurcati fur the Examination of C^aim^ 




N I NTH 




rii^'-i-rli 









<=>t^TH 



riGHTH 



i^ ?*». > ■^- L-^ 



innr 






■!l 



1 ' -I ' 






F" I (^T H 



■^^ 



. _JiLJ'^^. 



fH[— irFir?'^ 



-c=u l=f TH 



■'AveNuT 







A^E" -'•- 



SECOM.D 



A Ayjp 



KINGSBRIDGE ROAD-BOSTON POST ROAD. 



41 



BROOKLYN, GREENWOOD AND BATH PLANK ROAD. 

This is not an old road in the sense that Colonial highways are regarded as old 
roads. Indeed, this is quite a youthful highway compared with some of those that 
have been considered in these reports. 

The first reference found to this road is on January 15. 1831. when several citi- 
zens of New Utrecht petitioned the Commissioners of Highways to lay out a road 
"to be a continuation of the road now leading from Flatbush to New Utrecht Church, 
and to continue as nearly as may be in the same direction until it reaches the bay 
or river, passing through the land of John L. Van Pelt and Engelbert Lott ; thence- 
along the bank of said bay or river, or as near as will answer, through the lands of 
Engelbert Lott and Turnbull. until it meets the road or highway in front of the 
house of Jacob W. Bennett." This was subscribed before James C. Cropscy. Justice 
of the Peace. 

On July 28, 1831. Commissioners acted favorably on tlie petition and ordered the 
road laid out. On .\ugust 17, 18.31, John L. Van Pelt and Engelbert Lott appealed 
to the Court of Common Pleas, protesting against the laying out of the road. Com- 
plaint was made on several .grounds. On September 12, 1831. the Court of Common 
Pleas reversed the order of the Hi,ghway Commissioners. 

Four years elapsed during which nothing was done apparently, but on October 
10, 1835, a meeting was held in the house of Michael Hegeman of New Utrecht, where 
the petition of several freeholders was considered, and the Commissioners of High- 
ways directed that a public highway be laid out from "the road leading from Flat- 
bush to New Utrecht, near the Dutch Reformed Church," to the bay or ocean. This 
was to be cut through improved land of the following owners, the figures showing the 
amount of land to be taken from each as figured by Teunis G. Bergen, Surveyor. 



Part 
Owner. .\cres. Rods. Perches. of 



Perch. 



John I.. Van Pelt 2 . . 25 6,000 

Heirs of Reutgen Van Brnnt . . . . 2 4,000 

Engelbert Lott, deceased 2 . . 24 80,000 



Apparently this was satisfactory, for it does not appear that there was any further 
protest from those who before appealed to the Courts to have the proceedings set 
aside. 

In 1851, on February 26, a movement was started to have the road extended up 
to the Brooklyn City line at Thirty-eighth street. -'\ petition was filed with the Conunis- 
sioners of Highways in which the f ollowin.g appeared : 



42 

"Tin- undersigned owners are interested in lands through and over which the 
proposed highway descrihed in the above (petition) runs, hereby consent to the laying 
out the same, and in consideration of the l)cnefits therefrom accruing, hereby release 
to the Town of New Utrecht all claim to damages by reason of the laying out 
and opening said highway, on condition that we are allowed until the ist day of 
March, 1852, to remove our wood and reset our farms." This was signed by James 
L. Lefferts and seventeen others and sealed. 

This petition was acted upon favorably at a meeting of tlie Highway Commis- 
sioners held in the house of Jolm L. Van Pelt on February 3. 1852. The Commis- 
sioners determined that a highway be laid out in the said town of the width of sixty 
feet "on the application, consent and release of all claim for damages" of James L. 
Lefferts and several others, "through whose lands the said highway is to pass." 
Teunis G. Bergen made a survey of the road and in his description says that the 
road was to be laid out through "improved" lands. The minutes of the meeting 
then continue : 

"The said Commissioners therefore order, determine and certify that a public 
highway shall be and the same is hereby laid out of the width of sixty feet as above 
described and surveyed, in pursuance of the application, written consent and release 
of all claims for damages hereinbefore referred to." This was signed by J. Remsen 
Bennett, John L. Van Pelt and .John Cowenhoven, Commissioners. 

The road, which is the subject of the foregoing, is identified by the experts of the 
Commissioner of Records in Kings County as the road that later became known as 
the Brooklyn, Greenwood and Bath Plank road. 

It does not seem to be necessary to trace the career of the road in more recent 
years, and to record the various changes in the railroads which were operated upon 
it. In general, however, it may be said that the Brooklyn, Greenwood and Bath Plank 
Road Company obtained a consent of owners and of the Commissioners of Highways 
under date of April 25, 1852, consenting to the construction and use of a plank road. 
A survey was filed in the Register's office on July 30, 1852, by No. 452. On January 
24. 1863, the Brooklyn, Bath and Coney Island Railroad Company secured consents 
of the owners along the line of the road covering the route of the Plank Road Com- 
pany. This deed is recorded in Liber 588, at page 255. A more detailed account of 
the various changes in the ownership and operation of the railroads is contained in 
an opinion rendered by Corporation Counsel Rives. 



Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Oaims. 




Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Claims. 




JL 



KINGS H IQH W/KY- 



B" '-ar 



BROOKLYN, CRCCNW/OOD 
«• BA.TH RLA.IMK ROAD 



47 



BROOKLYN, JAMAICA AND FLATBUSH TURNPIKE. 

Length, 12.6 Miles. Intersects 222 Blocks. 

This is the name commonly applied to a road that existed in certain parts before 
turnpikes became a business venture in Kings County. The road has a long checkered 
history that is enmeshed in a web of special acts, mergers and the like, which have 
almost obscured its real identity. 

The road was one of the first, if not the very first, that was used by those who 
settled Brooklyn and the outlying settlements at Flatbush and Jamaica. To describe 
it in general terms, the road began at the East River, substantially where Fulton Ferry 
is now, and followed the general line of Fulton street up to Flatbush avenue and 
thence up Flatbush to .Atlantic. Near this point the road branched out in two direc- 
tions, one generally following the line of Flatbush avenue and leading to the settle- 
ment at Flatbush, the other continuing up Atlantic avenue, cutting through again to 
Fulton street and making many turns and deviations from the present line, and ter- 
minating at Jamaica. 

But long before white men settled in Kings County this path was used by the 
Indians. The headquarters of the Canarsie tribe was connected with this path by 
another that followed the line of the Hunterfly road. This was the course taken by 
the Indians to reach East River. 

Some time between 1643 and 1647 a settlement was made near the site of the 
present Fulton Ferry. The location was determined upon because of its pro.ximity to 
the ferry to New Amsterdam, a fact w^hich shows that the transportation problem was 
calling for solution even in those dreamy days. This settlement, which was little more 
than a cluster of huts, was known as "The Ferry." Leading from the settlement and 
skirting the locality called by the Indians "Ipthetanga," known now as the Heights, 
was a road leading toward Flatbush. This was known as the Ferry road. 

When settlers began what might be termed the first uptown movement, they 
located a town in the heart of the maize fields, between Wallabout and Gowanus, 
facing the road to Flatbush. This settlement was the beginning of Brooklyn. The 
locality is familiar now as the shopping district. 

The Ferry road was the main artery of travel between "The Ferry," "Brooklyn" 
and Flatbush during the Dutch occupation. It was referred to in various documents 
by different names, sometimes as the "Wagon road," sometimes "The Highway at 
Brooklyn Church." 

As early as 1634 portions of the road were in e-xistence as Indian paths, and indeed 
there is abundant evidence to prove not only that this was a Dutch road, but, moreover, 
that it was a road before the Dutch exercised authority. This question has been dis- 
cussed in an interesting opinion of the Court of Appeals (Dunham vs. Williams, 



48 

37 N'- v., 251), and also in Mott vs. Clayton (g App. D'w .. 181 ), in wliicli cases it was 
dtcided that the road was Dutch and that the City of Brooklyn in granting a release 
of its interest in the road passed a good title to the ground. 

If it were necessary to cstahlish only the fact that this was a Dutch niad the 
report might end here, but another question having intimate relation to the rights of 
the City must be considered. The road afterward became a turnpike, operated by a 
private corporation, and this circumstance, connected as it is with a maze of mergers 
and other devices of the law, makes a further examination of the history quite neces- 
sary. 

After the British took possession of the Dutch holdings the name of the road wa; 
changed to Kings highway, al. hough the names of old roads varied with the caprice of 
local favor, and this was no exception to the rule. It was also known as the Queens 
road, Gravesend path, etc., according to locality or fancy. 

The Kings highway (whicii will b.' treated in another report) was practically the 
same as the Flatbush and Jamaica turnpike up to certain points, beyond which the 
turnpike did not extend. The end of the turnpike on the Flatbush branch was at a 
point corresponding with the present intersection of Flatbush and Qiurch avenues. 

The popularity of the turnpike in this State dates from 1807. In that year a gen- 
eral act relative to turnpike companies was passed by the Legislature, and turnpike 
corporations sprang into general favor. This act provided, among other things, that 
when the income was equal to the expense incurred by the company, the State might 
dissolve the corporation, "and thereupon the right, interest and property of the said 
corporation shall be vested in the people of this State and be and remain at their dis- 
posal." 

hollowing the incorporation, numerous statutes were enacted relative to the com- 
pany. A brief reference to such acts follows though it is not known that the list 
embraces all the enactments relating to the turnpike: 

Date, March 17; Laws of i8oy. Chapter 74. 
Incorporated the Bro,:klyn. Jamaica and Flatbush Turnpike Company. Named 
John D. Ditmars and others to make a good and sufficient turnpike road to begin 
on the highway at or near the old and new ferry stairs in the township of Brooklyn, 
in Kings County, niimiug from thence through the village of Bedford to the dwelling 
house of Charles McNeil in the township of Jamaica, in Queens County; and also 
to make a further good and sufficient turnpike road, to begin on the highway in front 
of the church in the village of ITatlnish and running from thence toward Brooklyn 
ferry until it meets the said road leading to Jamaica, near the dwelling of the late 
John Cowenhoven. 

Laws of 1 818, Chapter 59. 

Authorized an increase of toll on "expensive pleasure wagons." The increase ap- 
plied also to the Jericho turnpike. 



49 

Date, April i8; Laws of 1823, Chapter 116. 
Passed April 18, amends original act of March 17, 1809. Authorized company to 
collect tolls, although no toll gate had been erected, "not less than i^ miles from the 
Episcopal church in Jamaica." Also authorized company to erect more toll gates. 

Date, April 3; Laws of 1827, Chapter 153. 
Incorporate Brooklyn as a village. Also set forth that road from the village line 
at Red Hook lane to the ferry was abandoned by the company. Brooklyn assumed all 
the expense of maintaining the road, but the company was authorized to continue 
collecting toil. 

Date, March 3; Laws of 1830, Chapter 63. 
Directors given the privilege of removing their easterly gate near Jamaica and "to 
place same on their road, between the house of Gidion Tooker and a point 80 rods 
easterly of the three-mile stake, near the Village of Bedford," when so removed to be 
subject to same restrictions and privileges as before. 

Laws of 1832. Chapter 256. 

Incorporated the Brooklyn and Jamaica Railroad Company. Upon payment the 
company immediately became entitled "to use" lands. Section 37 of the act directs the 
purchase of the stock of the Brooklyn, Jamaica and Flatbush Turnpike Company at 
$26 per share in cash or $23 per share in stock of the new company. Section 30 de- 
clared that at the end of ten years the State might purchase the property by paying 
cost of construction, maintenance, etc, plus 14 per cent, per annum. 

The Turnpike Company conveyed to the Brooklyn and Jamaica Railroad Com- 
pany on August 2, 1833 (Liber 53, page 271), and continued under such ownership 
until 185 1. 

Date, .\pril 23; Laws o: 1835, Chapter 132. 
Authorized appointment of Commissioners to lay out "streets, avenues and squares 
in the City of Brooklyn." To open or ck>S€ streets, highways, etc.. in Sixth, Seventh, 
Eighth and Xintfa Wards. Confirmed by chapter 41 Laws of 1839. 

Date, Mzy 9: Laws of 1837, Chatter 377. 
Authorized Brooklyn and Jamaica Railroad Company to alter part of the route 
of the Brooklyn and Jamaica turnpike road, between Parmenticr's Garden and lar"! ',•' 
the heirs of A. Selover. 

Date, April 18; L^ws of 1838, Chapter 262 
'^Vhenever any turnpike corporation shall become A di^con- 

tinuOT, its road shall become a public highway and be iotFJ- gai provisir/ns 

-egah''.-- 'J "-'?-.»ays." 



50 

Date, April .=6; 1-Tvvs of 1839, Chapter J56. 
Authorized a straightening of the road between the land of the heirs of A. Sel- 
ovcr and the intersection of the Cripple Bush road. Provided further that the com- 
pany might sell that portion of the old road when new road was opened and grantees 
of purchasers shnulil Ix'cume owners. 

n.itr. May i.V. Laws of 1846. Chapter 310. 

Authorized Brooklyn and Jamaica Railroad Company to cede parts of Brooklyn 
and Jamaica turnpike and Brooklyn and Flatbush turnpike road belonging to said 
company "as lies within the limits of the City of Brooklyn, to ^layor and Common 
Council of City of Brooklyn, on terms and conditions to be agreed upon. .-Xnd such 
cessions shall vest in the said Mayor and Common Council of the City of Brooklyn 
all the right, title and interest of the said company in the parts of the roads so ceded 
and in the bed of said parts of said roads, and whenever any part or parts of said road 
shall be so ceded as aforesaid, the same shall thenceforth cease to be considered a 
road, and shall belong absolutely to the purchasers or grantees thereof free from any 
liability to be used as a road." 

Provided further that company should continue to collect same toll after cession 
"whether said parts shall be kept open or closed, unless a lower rate of tolls shall be 
agreed upon,"' etc., or unless company waived the tolls. 

After cession company was freed of liability for repair, etc., Brooklyn assumed it. 
Ceded parts might be closed by order of Mayor and Common Council, "if othei 
ftreets or avenues convenient to and communicating with the other parts of said turn- 
pike roads shall have been opened and regulated, and such proceedings shall in other 
respects be had as are provided by law for closing the streets or avenues in said 
city." 

Year 1848, Chapter 373. 

Brooklyn and Jamaica Railroad Company authorized to sell property and fran- 
chises to Jamaica and Brooklyn Plank Road Company, which was incorporated under 
the general laws about 1850. 

The Brooklyn and Jamaica Railroad Company and Brooklyn, Jamaica and Flat- 
bush Turnpike C'unpany conveyed to Jamaica and Brooklyn Plank Road Company 
all interest, etc. (Liber 256, page 6.) This (jwnership continued until about 1879. 

Date, .April 25; Year 1864, Chapter 383. 
-•Vuthorized Jamaica and Brooklyn Plank Road Company to change location of or 
erect any toll gale, house or other building authorized anywhere on the road, when 
ordered to by Board of Directors. 

Date, May 7; Year, 1863, Chapter 507. 
William Durland, Martin 1. Duryca and others created a body corporate known 
as "East New York and Jamaica Railroad Company." Possessed general powers of a 



51 

turnpike company. Authorized to lay rails for "the passage of railroad cars to be 
drawn by horses on each side of the road now known as the Jamaica and Brooklyn 
plank road, from the terminus of the FuUon avenue road at the City line of the City 
of Brooklyn, Kings County, to any part of the Village of Jamaica, in Queens County." 
Corporation might agree for purchase of road, etc., '"and after the same shall have 
been purchased or obtained, the provisions of this act shall apply to such plank road 
or right thus acquired. Empowered to collect tolls "in case they shall purchase the 
franchise of the Brooklyn and Jamaica Turnpike and Plank Road Company." In 
case unable to agree with Jamaica and Brooklyn Plank Road Company, authorized to 
purchase real estate over and along Liberty avenue in accordance with act of April 2, 
1850. Provisions of "An act in relation to plank roads and turnpike roads," March 
28, 1854, applied where not in conflict. 

All rights, title and franchises, etc., of this n~>ad were acquired by the Jamaica, 
Woodhaven and Brooklyn Railroad Company by and from Edward M. Osborn and 
wife, -August 25, 1872 (Liber Deeds. 1920, p. 147). 

Property acquired by Osborn througii a conveyance by John H. Sutpin. January 
16, 1872 (Liber 365, page 9, County Clerk, Queens), and (Liber 1031, page 107, Reg- 
ister, Kings) given in pursuance of a judgment of foreclosure of a mortgage on the 
property of the East New York and Jamaica Railroad Company. 

The Jamaica. Woodhaven and Brooklyn Railroad, by virtue of this conveyance, 
claimed the right to construct, maintain and operate a railroad on the projierty. 

Date. May 2. 1864; Chapter 520. 
Authorized company to collect toll from funeral processions same as of others, 
except that the hearse and four carriages should pass free. 

Date, April 24. 1869; Chapter 310. 
Authorize closing and sale of road to the City of Brooklyn. Brooklyn authorized 
to sell and convey the land. Road to be paid for through annual tax levy. 

Date. April 21, 1871 ; Chapter 659. 
Amended act of 1S69, authorized company to sell to abutting owners or city land 
in front of oremises. 

Date, April 3, 1874; Chapter 119. 
Authorize the Jamaica and Brooklyn Plank Road Company to increase capital 
stock to the amount "they have actually expended in constructing and completing their 
road." Required to file a certificate setting forth amount of increase with the County 
Clerk of Queens. Required to first obtain consent of 60 per cent, of shares of stock 
represented in company. 

Date. 1879; Chapter 156. 
Authorized consolidation of the Jamaica, Woodhaven and Brooklyn Railroad Com- 
pany with the Jamaica and Brooklyn Plank Road Company. The new name was "the 



S2 

Jamaica and Brooklyn Road Company." To enjoy all the prixilegcs and exemption? 
of the two companies ■■until llu- expiration of the charter of the said railroad com- 
pany." 

Date, May 2, 1893; Chapter 527. 
Anu'iKls chapter 452, Laws of 1892. Permits appointment of Commissioners to 
condemn if the company refuses to sell. 

Date. May 8, 1895; Chapter 564. 
Repeals chapter 452, Laws of 1892, and chapter 527, Laws of 1893, and declares all 
proceedings under said acts to be void. This act authorized the acquisition of the road 
liy cnndcmnation, expense and cost to be paid from Jamaica Plank road bonds and 
then assessed. 

Chapter 356; Year, 1S97. 

Amends chapter 564, Laws of 1895, as to amount of money, etc. Nothing about 
property going to adjaceiU owners. 

Various portions of the old turnpike were sold to the City of Brooklyn. The data 
related to such sales has been gathered from various quarters, and the following 
schedule is not to lie understood as inditating that these were the only purchases made. 
The records of the Register's office in Kings County show the following conveyances: 

General Proz'isions Coni'cying to the City of Brooklyn. 
Dale, ()ctol)er 31, 1849; Liber 203, Page 4->2. 
Conveys all that part of Brooklyn and Jamaica turnpike between the westerly line 
of Red Hook lane and the intersection of Fulton and Flatbush avenues. 
Consideration $t,200 00 



Date, Novemlier 15, 1852: I^iber 301, Page 141, 
Conlirming above deed. 

Date, March 9, 1S52; Liber 272, Page 341, 
Conveys the road from Grand avenue to the Gowanus road (alxnit the present 
Fifth avenue). 
Consideration $5,000 co 



Date, September 29, 1852 ; Liber 30S, Page 75. 
Cedes all properly, etc, of the Turnpike Company between a point 255 feet easterly 
from the southeasterly corner of h'ulton avenue and New York avenue and the easterly 
side of Perry avenue (near the present Bedford avenue) and between the southerly 
side of Fulton avenue and a line drawn equi-distant from Fulton avenue and Herkimer 
street. Also that pari between Nostrand and Bedford avenues north of the north line 



S3 

of Fulton street. Also all that part between the east side of New York avenue and 
Perry avenue south of a line drawn equi-dislant from Fulton avenue and Herkimer 
street. 

Consideration ^^.^ ^ 



Classen avenue to Gowanus road, 50 feel adjoining southerly side of Atlantic 
avenue. Agreement to convey recorded in Liber 395, page 245. 

Date, .-Kugust 20. 1S55; Liber 412, Page 28.^ 

It will be recalled vhat the act incorporating P.rooklyn as a village, chapter 155, 
Laws of 1827, noted above, declared that the turnpike company abandoned its road 
from the ferry to the village line at Red Hook lane. This, added to the conveyances 
so far discovered, wouM indicate that there is very small doubt about the City's owner- 
ship of the old turnpike from the ferry to New York avenue, except of course such 
portions as have been released by proper autliority. That portion of the turnpike be- 
tween New York avenue and tlie line of tlie old Twenty-si.xth Ward presents another 
question. Between these points there is a shadow of uncertainty. Part of the road 
was Dutch and part came into existence at a later date. It would therefore be well to 
refrain from further discussion of this section until after a special investigation of con- 
ditions relative thereto. There may be direct conveyances of this property that have 
not yet been located, but the Brooklyn, Queens County and Suburban Railroad has 
executed releases for portions of this section and the question as to wliether this con- 
veyed a good title has been liaised. That company charged substantial sums for the 
releases, in some cases at least. Between these points, the road had two branches. One 
was far more circuitous and very much older than the other. It was the more direct 
route that the turnpike followed. It has been suggested that this section was laid out 
by the turnpike company for its own convenience. If this were a fact, it would seem 
in the light of decisions of the Court of Appeals, that when the turnpike company 
merged with a railroad, the lands held by it in a corporate capacity reverted to the 
owner of the fee. Upon its abandonment as a turnpike, the land would revert to th; 
fee owners automatically, so the fact that abutting owners paid for releases would not 
necessarily indicate fee ownership, but would seem to indicate that the company had 
abandoned the turnpike. The Court of Appeals in Mahon vs. New York Central and 
Hudson River Railroad Company (24 N. Y., 658) appears to cover the point. The 
Court in that case said : 

"Although the general act relating to turnpike companies, passed March 13, 1807, 
declares w-hen the president and directors pay the owners of the lands the sums 
assessed and awarded by the appraisers in their inquisition, they shall have and hold 
to them and their successors and assigns forever, the lands and tenements described 
in their inquisition; yet it has always been held that this and the special act of incor- 
poration vests in the company the title to the land over wliich the road passes only 
for the purposes of the road and when the road is abandoned, the land reverts to 



54 

llu' original owners. 'Ihc company only acquired such an estate in the land taken 
hy it as was necessary to fultlll the end and interest of the corporation and could 
hold it to no other use, intent or purpose. Having ceased to occupy the land in 
question for the purpose of a turnpike road, the Mohawk Turnpike Company in trans- 
ferring it, in effect abandoned it, and although they were autliorized hy tlie Legisla- 
ture to transfer it to the Utica and Schenectady Railroad Company, this could not 
constitutionally deprive the original owners of the land of their right of reversion 
without compensation." 

In view of the acts executed under authority of chapter 132 of the Laws of 1835, 
there does not appear to be much room for doubt that all the lands used hy the turn- 
pike have reverted. 

It was provided among old acts that "when Fulton avenue shall be opened and 
fit for travel, from Bedford avenue to the City line," the turnpike was to be deemed 
discontinued from Perry avenue (about Bedford avenue) to the City line, reserving 
the rights of the turnpike company. 

\\'1k)i Fulton avenue shall be opened and fit for travel from Red Hook lane to 
Bedford avenue (reserving the rights of the turnpike company) turnpike closed from 
Red Hook lane to Perry avenue. 

When "'Flatbush avenue shall be opened from Atlantic street to the City line, 
reserving to the Flatbush Turnpike Company all their legal rights, turnpike closed 
from Jamaica Turnpike to City line." 

What those "legal rights" were, in view of the decision of the Court of Appeals, 
is a legal question. 

I desire again to call especial altentin'.i to t!;at portion of the road between New 
York avenue and the boundary of the old Twenty-sixth Ward. If this section was 
laid fut over an existing road, the City may hold a considerable interest; if, on the 
other hand, it was laid out on private property, it w-ould seem that this was a trans- 
action between the company and private owners in which the City has no substantial 
interest. If this be the case and the owners have seen tit to buy releases from the 
company, a nominal sum w'ould doubtless be sufficient to compensate the City in such 
a situation. 

This point should be distinctly understood, because without explanation, if the 
City were to charge a substantial sum for a release on one portion of the road and 
release for a nominal sum on the same road a few blocks distant, it would at once 
open the door for charges of favoritism and unfair dealing, and would further open 
alluring fields for the exercise r)f that genius peculiar to critics who are usually more 
active than accurate. 

The City of Brooklyn purchased .-dl tliat portion of the turnpike lying within the 
lines of the Twenty-sixth Ward and the people of the Greater City are paying 35^ 



55 

per cent, interest on bonds to the ammint of $105,000, which were issued as a result 
of that transaction. The bonds will mature in 1917. It is not necessary to go into 
this matter at length, because the present highway in that section conforms with the 
line of the old turnpike. 

To sum up in conclusion ; 

The bed of the Brooklyn, Klatbush and Jamaica Turnpike was originally an Indian 
path ; it later became a Dutch road ; then an English road, and later a turnpike road. 

As new streets were opened, portions of the turnpike were abandoned, and in view 
of Court of Appeals decision, reverted to the original owners. Where the turnpike 
followed the old road the owner was the City. 

The turnpike followed an existing road for its entire length, save possibly that 
portion between New York avenue and the old Twenty-sixth Ward. 

In this section there is some doubt, a point that should be emphasized. 

From the Ferry to Red Hook lane, the road was abandoned to the Village of 
Brooklj-n. From Red Hook lane to New York avenue, it was conveyed to the City 
of Brooklyn by deeds. 

This report docs not assume to complete or to touch upon all the features that 
have presented themselves in the course of a long search among: statutes, histories and 
archives of local lore. I am especially indebted for much valuable information to the 
office of the Commissioner of Records in Kings County, and the Topographical Bureau 
of the Borough President's office in that Borough 



56 
BROOKLYN AND JAMAICA TURNPIKE. 

Supplemental Report. 

.-\ few weeks ;igG I siilnnitled to yoii a general repnrt dealing with tlie history 
of the Brooklyn, Flatbush and Jamaica tnrnpike. In that report special attention was 
called to conditions prevailing between New York avenue and tlie boundary line of 
111.- ..Id Twenty-sixth Ward, aud it was therein suggested that a further study of this 
section be made. I now have the honor to nresenl the results of a later examination. 

I have consulted with the experts of the Commissioner of Records office in Kings 
Couiily. wlin have specially examined and -ludied old maps, deeds and other records 
relating to the matter. The conclusion? are -.hal from New York avenue to Sumner 
avenue, the road was in existence prior to i66.t, these boundaries being stated gener- 
ally. At Sumner avenue a complication arises. The original road continued up to 
about Reid avenue, where an angular deviation occurred, the road veering in a south- 
erly direction (along Rcid avenue) and joining the Ihmterfly road a few blocks below. 
When the turnpike days arrived, it was found that a considerable distance could be 
saved by a direct road, eliminating the angular change, and such a road was made 
accordingly. This portion was therefore of comparatively recent date. 

Between Reid and Patchcn avenues still another complication arises. Some old 
maps show a slight curve in this section; others a straight line; and the question is 
whether this indicates a deviation from the original lines or not. By careful measure- 
ments the facts indicate that if a new- road was laid out at this point it doubtless 
included a portion of the original Dutch road, and so here is presented rather a novel 
situation. 

Trom Patchen avenue to a point just below Hopkinson avenue the turnpike fol- 
lowed the old Dutch road, but at that point there was another cut-oflf not unlike the 
one before described. The old road followed a winding course, turning south again 
and crossing the Eastern Parkway Extension. The later road was the string to this 
bow. At intersecting points, conditions siiuilar lo those already referred to may be 
found, but no ^--pecific instance has yet appeared in this section. 

Respectfully siilimittcd for approval. 



Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Claims. 



'onoc 




BROOKLYN JAMAICA 
a. rLATBUSH TURNPIKE. / 



Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Claims. 




BROOKLYN JAMAICA 

a. FLATBusH turnpike: 



ci_ove RO/vD 



Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Claims. 




BROOKLYN JAMAICA 
,««P'i-ATBU»H TURNPlKt 



Depaitment of Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Cla 




/ 






65 
OLD BUSHWICK ROAD. 

Length, I Mile. Intersects 33 Blocks. 

In general it may be stated that this road extended from the old settlement at 
Bushwick to the Jamaica road at a point which corresponds substantially with what 
is now known as the Cemetery of the Evergreen. For a considerable portion of the 
distance it followed a line that corresponds closely with Bushwick boulevard. In- 
deed, much of the old road lies within the lines of this boulevard and some strips of 
the road which were left when the present street was laid were made the subject of 
Legislative enactments. The particulars are discussed below. 

This is an old Dutch road, according to data obtained from the office of the 
Commissioner of Records of Kings County. It was known, as early as 1640, as 
"Highway running from the Kills," and in 1661 as "bet Kevis padt," meaning "The 
Cross Road," because of the fact that it crossed some of the other roads of old 
Bushwick. It was a convenient avenue of travel from Bushwick to the main high- 
way. 

The Legislature, by various acts, closed portions of the old Bushwick road and 
specifically authorized adjoining owners to fence in and use such lands as were not 
required for Bushwick boulevard and other streets. Following is a list of such acts, 
but this list may be incomplete. Tlie Law Department doubtless has more detailed 
information on the point ; 

Laws of 1868, cliapter 8jr. Provisions: Closes Bushwick road, between Grand 
street and Marshal (now Seigel) street and authorizes adjoining owners to fence in, 
use, etc., such lands as are not required for Bushwick road and other streets. 

Laws of 1859, chapter 439. Provisions: Closes Bushwick road, between Remsen 
(now Maujer) and Meserole streets and between Boerum and McKibben streets. 
Adjoining owners authorized to fence in, etc. 

Laws of 1873. chapter 354. Provisions: Closes all that part of F.ushwick road 
southeast of Ivy {now Madison) street and northwest of Virgilius, late John street 
(now Jefferson avenue), except that part laid out as Evergreen avenue. 

Laws of 1890, chapter 272. Provisions: Common Council authorized to dis- 
continue and close all that porticjn of Bushwick road as laid down by commissioners 
on the map of Bushwick. southeast of Virgilius, late John street (now Jefferson 
avenue), to Evergreen Cemetery, adjoining owners authorized to occupy. 

The sum of these acts leaves certain sections of the road uncovered, so it seems 
that there are cither additional acts, or tliat some owners enjoyed privileges denied 
others. The point is important and in order that the apparent difiference in the legal 
status of various portions of the road, I would respectfully recommend that all appli- 
cations for releases along this line be referred to the Corporation Counsel. 



Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Claims. 




Dcpartinetit of Finance, r.urcau for the Examination of Claims. 



n^.aem»i 




OLD BUSHWICK R0>.0 



71 
CHURCH LANE OR EAST BROADWAY. 

Length, 3.8 Miles. Intersects 142 Blocks. 

Cluirch lane branched east and west from Midwcjnt (Flatbnsh), and was one 
of the main arteries of travel in the very early times. 

That portion lying east of the present Flatbush avenue was the road through 
which the cattle and hay wagons of the Midwout settlers were driven to the salt 
marshes bordering Jamaica Bay. Frotn this circumstance the lane was known at 
one time as Koe (Cow) street. A portion of the salt meadows lying just above 
what was known as Fresh Creek was patented by Governor Stuyvesant to Midwout 
in 1656 and was used in common by the' inliabitants of the settlement. Salt hay 
was a product of great importance, for it furnished a natural fodder for cattle that 
the untamed uplands would not yield without the expenditure of considerable time 
and labor in cultivating the ground. It was very largely for this reason that marsh 
lands were eagerly sought by all the pioneers in the section. 

Church lane furnished an almost direct road from Midwout to the head of Fresh 
Creek and continued along the road that skirted the marshes. 

By data obtained from reliable sources it appears that Church lane was referred 
to as "The Road" January jg, 1658, and as "The Highway" on November 3, 1659, 
in official docmnents. 

Both of the dates mentioned were included in the period of the Dutch sovereignty 
here, so there does not appear to be any doubt about the fact that Cluirch lane or 
avenue, sometimes known as East Broadway, was a Dutch road and under the law 
of Holland was owned absolutely by the government of which the present City of 
New York is successor. 

That portion of the road lying west of the present Flatbush avenue was also Dutch 
and what has been said of the other portion may be applied to this with such alter- 
ations as the geographical features of the country suggest. 

On March 15, 1899, the Board of Puljlic Improvements authorized tha opening 
of Churcli avenue, from Flatbush avenue to Brooklyn avenue. 

On December 19, 1902. there was a reduction of assessments, the City assuming 
55 per cent, of the cost of the proceeding. On April 28, 1903, the report of the Com- 
missioners w-as confirmed. 

In this proceeding the lines of Church avenue were straightened and portions 
of the old road, which followed an irregular course, were left between the land of 
private owners and the lines of tlic new street. Several applications for releases of 
the City's interest in such strips are now pending. 

Numerous other references showing the road to be very ancient might be cited, 
but those already adverted to seem to render unnecessary any further discussion of the 
point. 



Dei^rtmeT^t of Finarice, Eurear for the Exsir.inaticin if Ca 



,^0>k>D P"^»OM NCV/UT 




CHURCH LA.NJ 



Department of Finance. Rnreau fur the Examination of Claims. 



11 1 1 IL 



HOST- r ^»>N D 




AVE 



CHURCH LANE 



CLOVE ROAD. 

Length, 1.9 Miles. Intersects 33 Blccks. 

This road connected the settlement of Bedfonl with that at Flalbush in tlie 
Dutch days. Flatbnsh was in the early Dutch period the county seat and place of 
prime importance. 

The settlement of Bedford grew out of the difTicnlties which the settlers of Brook- 
lyn and Wallabout experienced in hauling hay from the salt meadows along the 
shores of Jamaica Bay. Bedford was a more convenient starting point because it 
materially shortened the haul. 

In 1662 Governor Stiiyvesant in response to a petition made to him granted to 
each of certain petitioners twenty morgcns of land at Bedford. This represented 
about forty acres apiece. The home lots were located at what became known as the 
Village of Bedford, at the intersection of three roads, the main road (later known 
as Jamaica Turnpike), the Cripplebush road and the Clove road. The plantations 
of wdiich the home lots were a part, extended from the Clove to the Hunterfly road. 
This situation considered with certain other circumstances leads to the belief that 
the Clove road was in existence for some time before Bedford was settled as a com- 
munity. 

There was a combination known as the five Dutch towns, composed of Brooklyn, 
Flatbush, Flatlands, New Utrecht and Bushwick. .\ register commissioned by tlie 
Director General travelled from town to town and took proof of wills, marriage 
settlements and other things, and in those primitive days chose the road that offered 
the fewest obstacles. From Bushwick to Flatbush the Bushwick and Cripplebush 
roads would carry the traveller to the main road (FnUon street of to-day) and then 
his most direct course for Flatbush was through the Clove road. Indeed, it would 
have involved considerable time and labor to have sought his destination by any other 
route. 

Even the name of the road suggests that it extended a mute invitation to go that 
way. Clove means cleft and its application in this relation is that it indicated the 
road through the cleft in the hills. 

On February 26, 1664, Governor General Stuyvesant issued a patent to Cornelius 
Van Ruyven and one of the boundaries of the land was "The Path." This land has 
been located by experts of the Commissioner of Records in Kings County and "The 
Path" identified as the road that was known more recently as the Clove road. 

On February 18, 1666, Thomas Lambertse secured a patent in which "The Carte- 
way," "Pathway" or "Highway" was made a boundary. This has likewise been 
identified as the Clove road. While it may be argued that 1666 was two years after 
the surrender, it should also be borne in mind that land is not usually described as 



78 

bounded by a bigbway unless tbat liiybuay is generally known and a liigbway or 
anytbing else does not become generally known luuil it lias been in general use for 
some considerable period. 

A fnrtber evidence tbat ibe road was tben generally known and well travelled 
is furnisbed by wbat is perhaps tbe first liquor license ever issued to tbe Bedford 
section. 1 bonias Lanibcrtse, who secured the patent referred to in the foregoing, 
desired to establish an "Ordinary" for the entertainment of man and beast, so he made 
application to tbe Governor, and on December 17, 1668, the following license was 
issued : 

"License granted to Thomas Lamberts, of Redford. to sell beer, wine and other 
liquors. 

"Whereas. Thomas Lamberts, of Bedford, within the jurisdiction of Brooklyn, in 
tbe West Riding of Yorkshire, upon Long Island, is willing to undertake tbe keeping 
of an Ordinary for tbe accommodation of travellers and other persons passing that 
way, with diet and lodging and horse meals. I do hereby give him license to sell 
beer, wine or any other strong liquors for their relief. And for his further en- 
couragement therein do think lit to order that no person living in said Village of 
Bedford have privilege to do so but himself. 1 his license to continue for one year 
after the date hereof and no longer. Given under my hand at I'ort James in New 

York, tliis 17th dav of December, 1668." 

FRANCIS LOVELACE. 

The worthy Lamberts probably did not engage in business for the purpose of losing 
wampum, so bis selection of a site at Bedford for the establishment of a road house 
indicated that there was considerable traffic passing through the settlement. As 
Flatbush was the principal town and centre of activity, the road leading thereto 
was likely to be a popular channel of travel and a road house situated at the junction 
where this important highway piet others branching in various directions, was likely 
to prove a source of comfort to its patrons and profit to its promoter. 

Other references to the road bearing date of very early times taken with the 
foregoing, leave no reasonable doubt that the Clove was a Dutch road. Portions of 
this old road south of Eastern Parkway still trace their way through open fields. 



Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Claims. 



n KVM'^kY 




8i 
DE BRUYNS LANE. 

Length, 7-10 of a Mile. Intersects 12 Blocks. 

Dc Briiyiis lane is a road lliat runs fn>ni tlie Kings Highway to Gravesend Bay. 
It is east of Bennetts lane, vvliich lias been treated in another report. 

This. lane is one of the earliest that e.xisted in Kings County, and, like many other 
roads, was first probably an Indian trail leading to the water. The lane takes its 
name from one Francis Brown, known earlier as De Bniyn, whose name is impressed 
on the history of that locality because of a certain famous law suit over the owner- 
ship of a strip of meadow Land claimed by both De Bruyn's successors and the town 
of Gravesend. An action to determine the respective rights was brought in tlie 
Supreme Court at Flatbush in 1789. Aaron Burr appeared as counsel for the town 
of Gravesend and secured a decision in favor of the tow-n. For this service and all 
expenses, he received a fee of 35 poimds, which does not seem excessive when com- 
pared witli some modern retainers. 

Long before De Bruyn appeared upon the scene the lane was in existence. It 
was the dividing line between a large tract of land that was patented in 1643 to An- 
thony Jansen and a series of nine lots known as "The Plantations," some of which 
were laid out as early as 1657. This tract of land and the plantation lots extended 
from the Kings Highway to the sliore of Gravesend Bay, and the lane was the only 
means of reaching the interior plantation lots from the front. 

As the settlement of New Utrecht grew, the lane became an important factor in 
the life of the connnunity. In those days there was excellent fishing in Gravesend 
Bay, and shell fish of many kinds were abundant. Dankers and Sluyter, who traveled 
through the Kings County section in 1679, and kept a journal of their expedition, 
state that in the Gowanus district the oysters were particularly plentiful and were 
very frequently about one foot long. 

Fishing was not the only privilege of value commonly enjoyed by the settlers. 
It was also a common privilege to rake the sedge grass that was washed on the 
shore, and this was a source of profit to many. The avenue through wliich they 
sought these fields was either Bennetts or De Bruyns lane, and what may be said of 
one may also, in general, be said of the other, but Bennetts lane has been treated in 
another report. 

Large fields of salt meadow land skirted the bay in some places and settlers of 
the surrounding towns were in the habit of driving their cattle through the Kings 
Highway and down either Bennetts or De Bruyns lanes to the salt hay fields, all of 
which is cited to show that the lane dates from the days of the Dutcli occupation 
here. Many transfers of the plantation properties and that tract across the road from 
them, might be scheduled bearing dates prior to 1664. when the English nominally 
assumed control. 



82 

There is no doubt whatever that Dc Briiyns lane is a Dutch road. As sucli, accord- 
ing to legal authority, the fee of the roadbed is in the City. 

Portions of the land have been closed by resolutions, but the resolutions did not 
clothe the abutting property owners with any right to fence in the lane without first 
getting a proper release from the City authorities. The lane was closed from Eighty- 
sixth .<:trcet to Kings Highway by resolution July 21, 1891 ; from Eighty-sixth street 
to Benson avenue, December 23, 1897; from Benson avenue to Cropsey avenue — reso- 
lution of the Board of Estimate and Apportiounient — June 14. IQ07. printed 1492 of the 
minutes. 



Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Claims. 



BROOKLYIS- GPiEEN WOO D 
S. BATH F="UANH RO/VDi \\ 



NF:<^ UTF^EC HT TO FLATBUSH 




DE BRUYNEIS LANE. 



85 
GOWANUS ROAD. 

Length, 2.8 Miles. Intersects 65 Blocks. 

Brooklyn was born at Gowainis ; that is to say, of the territory which was later 
included within the boundaries of the City of Brooklyn, the first purchases by white 
men were made at Gowanus. 

In 1636 William Adriaense Bennet and Jacques Bentyn purchased 930 acres of land 
lying along Gowanus Cove. This is the first purchase of land in that locality of which 
any authentic record remains. 

On November 28. 1639, Thomas Bescher secured a patent to a piece of land ad- 
joining Bennet's land. Frederick Lubbertsen on May 26, 1640, secured a patent to a 
considerable stretch of what is now known as the South Brooklyn water-front. 

These lands were settled and wherever there is a settlement there is a road. Among 
the earliest jettlements within the limits of Brooklyn were the Ferry and the "Waal- 
bogt" or Wallabout. The ferry was near the site of Fulton Ferry, on the road that 
later developed into Fulton street. From the road the Gowanus road branched oflf 
and led toward the settlements that dotted the shore toward the Xarrows. 

On .\pril 5, 1642, Director General William Kieft issued the following patent to 
Cornelis Lanibertsen Coo! : 

"We, William Kieft, Director General and Council, etc., herewith declare and 
testify that to-day, dated underwritten, we have granted to Cornelis Lambertsen Cool 
a certain piece of land situate upon Long Island called Gouwanes, reaching in width 
from the wagon road running through said land, and Jan Patersen's land lying along 
the river to a certain copse where William Adriacnsen's land is next : Whereas this 
land has formerly been occupied by Jan van Rotterdam and Thomas Beets, it is ex- 
pressly stipulated that the paths running over this piece of land shall remain open; 
in addition to this piece a part of the meadow situate near the valley of .Anthony 
Jansen froiu salee, containing 2S morgens, is granted to Cornelis Lambertsen; all 
with the express condition and stipulation, etc., etc. 

''Done the 5th of -\pril, 1642, at Fort .Xmsterdam, X. X., by order of the Ilon'ble 
Director and Council. 

(Signed) "WILLIAM KIEFT, 

"CORXELIS VAX TIEXHOVEX, 

■'Sccty." 

The "wagon road" referred to in the foregoing is identified by the experts of the 
Commissioner of Records in Kings County as the Gowanus road, and there seems 
hardly room for any reasonable doubt in the point. 



86 

]-"iirther cvidonce of tlic existence of tlie Gowainis road diiriiiK tlic Dutch davs 
is provided by the record of a conveyance from 'lluiinis Nyssen, farmer, to Adam 
Brouwer. Nyssen appeared before a notary pubhc — one Dirck Schelluyne — On April 
I, 1654, and declared that lie had conveyed to Bronwer the following : 

"Certain i>arcell of P.ushland (woodland) linieting Easterly after (in rear of) his 
house and land broad 45 rods (551 ft. 3 in.) proceeding to the highway (probably the 
old road from Govvanus to Brooklyn) and his land so far in the Bush (woods) as ye 
patent of Theunis Nyssen doth contain (extend), etc." 

The words in parenthesis in the foregoing are by the late Tennis G. Bergen, who 
was conceded to be one of the foremost authorities on the early history of Kings 
County. Mr. Bergen was a surveyor and so had special ability for accurately locating 
land grants, roads, etc. His designation of "The Highway" at the old Gowanus road 
would seem to leave little room for doubt that this was a Dutch road, even if there 
were no other circumstances pointing to the same conclusions. 

The early reference to this as a wagon road indicates that it had been in existence 
for some time prior to 1642, for wagons were not sent into liarreu country on aimless 
errands. Like many other old roads, this was probably developed by the Dutch from an 
Indian path. 

No road within the borders of Kings County had a more fascinating history than 
the Gowanus road. It was doubtless along this road that the keen Labadist fathers 
Bankers and Sluyter made their memorable journey in 1679, the record of which is one 
of the most illuminating pages of early history now in existence. It was along this 
road that the left wing of the British Army, known as Grant's division, marched in 
1776 from the Narrows and held the American forces in check while tlie plan of battle 
was developed by the other divisions. It was on this road, too, that later in the day. 
General Sterling finding his line of retreat cut off by Lord Cornwallis, savagely 
attacked the British, but was finally overwhelmed. 

The purpose of this report, however, is not to review history ; it is simply to show 
that the Gowanus road was of Dutch origin and under the law of Holland, tlic fee 
belonged absolutely to the Government. 

The Borough President of Brooklyn has forwarded a report of his Topographical 
Bureau showing the portions of the Gowanus road closed by lawful authority. Follow- 
ing is a copy of said report : 

"From the boundary line between New LUrecht and Brooklyn (Sixtieth street) to 
Forty-ninth .street, and from the line between the farms of Bergen and Van Pelt 
(probably between Forty-third and Forly-fourtli streets) to its intersection willi Third 
avenue (about Thirty-ninth street), the road was closed by resolution of the Common 
Council of the City of Brooklyn on March 30. 1840. 

"The road from Third avenue to I'ourth avenue was closed by the Common Coun- 
cil, September 27, 1847; a parallel street (Thirty-sixth street) having been ceded, 
opened and accepted. 



87 

"From Third avenue, at its intersection with Twenty-eightli street, to the old black- 
smith's sliop at Thirty-sixth street between Fourth and Fifth avenues, the road was 
closed by the Common Council, February 23, 1846. 

"The Committee on Streets reported to the Common Council at its meeting of 
April 25, 1853, on a petition to close the road from President street to Sackett street, 
that the Board had no power to close the road until Fourth avenue shall have been 
opened for travel. No record found of any further action. 

"The following references apply to a branch of the main (iowanus road, know^n as 
Gowaiuis lane; also as Mill road or road to Freak's Mill, which extended from Gowanus 
road to Court street, near Baltic street, 

"A petition to close this road from Court street to Freak's Mill was referred to 
the Street Committee, October 19, 1835. No data found of any further action. 

"The Street Commissioners of the Common Council, on July 5, 1836, reported on 
a petition to close the road from Warren street to Baltic street, stating that the power 
to close vests in the commissioners appointed to lay out the street system for the city. 

"At a meeting of the Common Council, held on May 13. 1839. the Street Committee 
of the Common Council reported on a petition to close the road from Court street to 
Hoyt street, stating that such petition was not in accordance with law. 

"The Committee on Streets reported April 29, 1844, to the Common Council on a 
proposition to close the road to Freak's Mill, stating that the road had been heretofore 
treated as private property and assessments have been levied thereon. The report was 
laid on the table. 

"From Baltic street to Hoyt street, the road was closed by the Common Council, 
June 30, 1S45. 

"The Common Council, on August 5, 1S39, closed the road from Court street to 
Butler street. 

"The road in the block bounded by Douglass street, Degraw street, Hoyt street and . 
Bond street was closed by the Common Council, November 27, 1848. 

"From Butler street to Douglass street, the road was closed by the Common Council 
April 21, 1851." 



Department of Finance, Bureau for tl.e Kxamiiiation o 



f Cla 




GO WAN US F?0^0 



91 
HUNTERFLY ROAD. 

Length, 2.6 Miles. Intersects 40 Blocks. 

The status of this road dififcrs from tliat of some others discussed in these re- 
ports, because many portions of the Hunterfly road are still uninclosed, and, therefore, 
claims of ownership through adverse possession are not likely to be seriously urged. 

Searching through the remains of centuries that are gone is a work that cannot 
proceed with the rapidity that would be possib'.c had our worthy forefathers left com- 
plete records of their roads. The report does not assume to be complete in all 
detail, but in its preparation many authorities have been consulted, and, as a result, 
I believe that the road shown as the Hunterfly, was originally an Indian trail leading 
to the wampum beds on the shores of Jamaica Bay, was developed under the Dutch 
and used by them for various purposes, particularly as a hay path; and under the 
British, continued in use as a road for general purposes and in a period well within 
the memory of persons living now, was used as an avenue of communication from 
the main road (Jamaica turnpike) to the shore districts of Canarsie. 

That the story may be presented in orderly fashion, it w'ill be considered under 
three heads: First, the Indian times; second. Period of the Dutch Sovereignty; 
third, Period of British Supremacy down to modern times. 

Tlie Indian Times. 

Long Island was known in early times as Matanwake, Pavmanake, Meailjwax, 
Sewanhacky, etc. The last name indicates in a measure the characteristic feature 
of Long Island as it appeared in Indian times. Sewan was a word practically synony- 
mous with wampum, and the two are often used interchangeably. Sewanhacky 
means "Island of the Shells," from which it will be seen that the shell deposits on 
Long Island were unusually abundant. This circumstance is frequently meiuioned in 
early history. 

Wampum, the circulating medium of the Indians, was made from shells, and 
the shores of Long Island provided a natural mint. Jamaica Bay, and particularly 
about the shores of Canarsie, there were deposits of exceptional extent and value, 
hence it is not surprising to learn that the Indians established a headquarters at 
Canarsie, for Indians, like their white l)rethren, liked to get as close as possible to the 
currency. 

The Indians that inhabited this end of Long Island belonged to the Algonquin 
race, although referred to as Mohcgans by Dutch writers. The Canarsies, a branch 
of the race, controlled all of wdiat is now Kings County, and a portion of Queens 
County. The tribe was further subdivided under local names, and settlements existed 
at Brooklyn, Wallabout, etc.. but the headquarters of the tribe appears to have been 
at Canarsie. A place of such importance, being the capital and I'lnancial centre, so 



92 

to speak, necessarily lia.l to he appiuachable, and tlic location of the Ilunterny road 
indicates that it was the route followed hy braves of the local tribes when they visited 
headquarters at Canarsie. 

The topography of the road indicates tliat it was originally an Indian trail. In 
regions of circumscribed area, such as islands, Indians, in making journeys, followed 
tlie line of least resistance; that is to say, they followed depressions in the land and 
skirted hills wherever possible, which accounts for the \ery crooked lines of many 
old paths. Kcing familiar with the entire country, and ha\ing no resident enemies 
to fear, tluy miglit select the easiest line of communication. It has been stated by 
some writers that certain Indian trails followed the highest points, as a measure of 
military precaution, in order that the\- might conmiand a view of the surrounding 
country, and afford timely warning of an ajjproaching enemy. These writers consider 
long trails passing far beyond settlements or camps and through country that was the 
common roving groun<l of hostile forces, lluntertly road followed the natural de- 
pressions through the bills and alnng the lines of least resistance in the valleys. 

On this point the testimony of the late Tunis G. Bergen is apjiropriate. The 
Mr. Bergen was a surveyor of wide experience, and an antiquarian of note, as a mem- 
ber of one of the oldest families in Kings County, lie had access to many private docu- 
ments relating to the early affairs of the locality, and, being personally fond of re- 
search, the information which he gathered on such subjects was particularlv valu- 
able. In an old case whicli was tried before a jury, Air. Bergen testified as follows 
in relation to the Huntertly road: 

"I know tlie topography of that section of the country over which the Huntertly 
road ran. It is a kind of gorge in the hills, a depression, a general depression as a 
general thing, across the hills. It is the most easy passage for travel in that vicinity, 
and any other would be difficult— not impossible, but much more difficult. It is the 
easiest route in that locality." 

Question: -Wh.it early settlements would find this passage through the hills the 
most convenient and suitable route for passing from one to the other? 

Answer: 'Tt would connect \ew Lots and Canarsie, and also Jamaica with the 
Brooklyn ferry. That portion of Flatlands known as Canarsie it would connect, and 
that portion called Renters Hook, but not the Village of Flatlands. This settlement 
of Renters Hook was located just after you pass the boundary of Brooklyn on the 
Ilunterfly road m-.w New Lots." 

In this case all testimony tending to establish the existence of the Hunterfly road 
m Dutch times was excluded by the court, although some testiinony tending to estab- 
lish it as an Indian trail was admitted. In this connection ;\Ir. Bergen contributed 
an interesting bit of testimony which tends to show that Canarsie was a place of im- 
portance in Indian times, and was naturally reached by a road. He stated that rather 
recently heaps of shells had been found at Canarsie. These, I\Ir. Bergen testified, 



93 

were used "generally by the Indians in tlie niauufactiire of ivanipnni, and also by the 
early settlers for the same purpose. The most valuable wampum — the colored wam- 
pum — was made of the portion of the shell which is blue, broken off for the pur- 
pose of getting the blue portion. White wampum was not so valuable. The heel 
of the clam, where it is fastened, that portion of the shell is of a blue color. It was 
the fact that those shells that were found in heaps had that bine portion taken from 
them as a general thing." 

Wampum was not only a medium of e.xcliange, it was also highly prized as an 
article for personal adornment, indeed, wampum possessed such varied qualities of 
attractiveness that it was sought by everyone. The mine which produced this desir- 
able commodity was naturally the ^lecca of Pilgrims from various districts, and pil- 
grimages make roads if they do not find them already made. 

In our own day let gold be discovered in the heart of a tangled wilderness and 
very shortly there will be a well trodden road marking the way to the treasure land. 

Period of the Dutch Sovereignty. 

By 1640 the Dutch bad acquired title by purchase to all the land embraced within 
the present limits of Kings and Queens Counties. The title was secured under three 
separate purchases, which are noted here to show that all the land within the present 
limits of Kings County was held by the Dutch, who exercised jurisdiction over it. 
This will. I trust, dispose of intimations that the Dutch exercised no authority in Kings 
County. 

On .August I, 1638, Governor Kieft purchased from the Indians all the land em- 
braced in the old Tov.n of Bushwick and a large portion of what was later known as 
Newtown. 

On January 15, 1639, the same Governor purchased from the Indians all that portion 
of Long Island' extending from Rockaway eastward to Sicktew-Kacky on the south 
side, and thence across to Martin Gerritsens, or Cow, Bay, on the north shore. With 
the purchase mentioned abcve, this gave the Dutch title to all the land in the present 
County of Queens. 

On May 10, 1640, Governor Kieft purchased from Pcnhawits, the great Chief of 
the Canarsics, all the land left to him by his father, with all his hereditary rights and 
"titles thereto. The'Canarsie tribe claimed the whole of the lands included within the 
limits of Kiiigs County and a part of the Town of Jamaica. 

As early as 1647 Kieft issued a patent to George Baxter and Richard Clof with 
associates, for a tract of land at Canarsie "with the meadow lands thereto belonging." 

Meadow lands deserve special comnK-nl because of the imporl.ince they achieved in 
pioneer days. Being valuable, they had to be accessible, and to be accessible by land 
they had to be approached by roads. These meadow lands derived their value from 
the grasses which were cut and dried for salt hay. In a primitive country where the 



94 

land was unsubdued the cultivation of sweet hay in any considerable quantities involved 
much time and labor. Meanwhile the cattle had to be fed. The struggle for existence 
was severe enough of itself, so the bounty of the salt marshes was relied upon for 
hay to carry the cattle through the winter months. 

While there were other salt marshes of limited area in other portions of what is 
now Kings County, the meadows which skirted Jamaica Bay were relied upon by the 
inhabitants of almost all the towns for the major supply. Residents of Brooklyn and 
Wallabout journeyed in their clumsy wagons to the distant marshes in order to secure 
fodder for the cattle. 

From the main road the Hunterfly provided an almost direct road to the shore 
district. The journeys, however, were so tedious and were attended by so much loss 
to the load en route that the people of Brooklyn and Wallabout in 1662 presented the 
following petition to Governor Stuy\'esant: 

"A friendly request to the Honorable Director, General and Council of New Nether- 
lands, whether they will please to grant us a piece of free woodland, situate in the rear 
of Joris Rapailje's land, along the old path to the bay. This done in the Wallebocht 
the TStli of March, 1662. Signed by Jans Joris Rapailje and five others." 

It was answered : 

"The desired piece of land is rented to the petitioners on condition that they remove 
their dwelling houses to one or the other settlement most convnient to them, and do 
not make a new settlement. Dated as above, March 30. 1662." 

The old path to the bay referred to in the petition could hardly have been any 
other than the Hunterfly road. It is so identified by the experts of the Commissioner of 
Records office in Kings County after a careful and thorough search of the records and 
the situation in the locality at that period supports the selection. Rapailje's land faced 
on Wallabout Bay and extended back to a point bordering what is now known as the 
Bedford section. The rear of Rapailje's land would, therefore, be that territory which 
now lies in the Bedford section, and the only path leading through that section to the 
bay was the Hunterfly road. It will also be observed that in 1662 the path was referred 
to as "old," which indicated an existence long before that time, and describing it as 
the path "to the bay" indicates that it was an avenue through which the shore districts 
were connected with some of the settlements. 

On May 26, 1663, the following petition was r.ddressed to Governor Stuyvesant : 

"May 26, 1663. 

"We humbly and friendly present to the Honorable Director General and Council 
that we have lately obtained from your Honors the grant of a piece of land in the rear 
of the Wakbocht near Marcies plantation and as your petitioners have cleared their 
enclosed lots, sonic of them having already planted and sown, while others are begin- 
ning 10 plant and as we would live very far from our properly, we request ail together, 
that we may be allowed to form a hamlet there among ourselves to protect our property. 



95 

Not doubting that your Honors will grant our request and do us a great favor, for 
which we shall always feel obliged, we await, etc." 

Signed Thomas Lan-.bertson and fifteen others. 

After reading the foregoing petition it was decided : Fiat quod pelitur. Date as 
above. 

These two documents form the foundation of what later became the Village of 
Bedford. The first, it will be observed, was a grant of land, but the foundation of a 
new settlement was expressly prohibited. This restriction was no doubt placed in the 
grant for a military reason. With a burgher army numbering but a handful of men 
it was necessary to keep settlements within the lines at "concentrations"' as a measure 
of protection. The second document prays for permission to establish a hamlet, from 
■which circumstances it would appear that a sufficient number of persons had become 
interested in the movement to provide self protection, and so, by granting the per- 
mission sought, Bedford sprang into existence as a political community. 

Shortly after this the Governor issued patents, each embracing about twenty 
morgen, or forty acres, of land, to several persons who formed the hamlet of Bedford. 
These grants have been carefully searched by the experts in the office of the Com- 
missioner of Records in Kings County, and the result shows that they were bounded 
by the Clove and Hunterfly roads, which formed natural boundaries. 

A petition which some of the settlers of Brenckelyn addressed to Governor Stuy- 
vesant on March i, 1663, described the difficulties which attended the handling of hay 
over an extended territory and seeks to minimize the difficulties by establishing a new 
settlement. The locality sought was probably Bedford, which would have lessened 
the distance for a considerable extent. The record does not show that this petition 
was granted, but the failure is explained by the fact that the people of Wallabout, and 
some from Brooklyn, already had claims which are set forth in their second petition. 

Though somewhat out of 'he order of events, it will be appropriate to advert here 
to a conveyance dated May i.^, 1693, and recorded in Liber i at page 126, Register's 
office. Kings County. Under that date Hendrick Classen Vechten and John Garretse 
Dorlent, on behalf of the people of Brenckelyn, conveyed to Jacobus Vandewater : 

-All that piece or parcel cf land with appurtenances lying situate and being near 
Bedford, in the township of Broockland in Kings County upon the Island of Nassau, 
formerly Long Island, bounded by a black oak tree marked N on the one side and W 
on the other side of said tree, on the south side of the land of William Poss of Bed- 
ford, in the town aforesaid and beginning at said tree and stretching along the high- 
way aforesaid to Flatbush, alias Midwouth in the County aforesaid to a like black oak 
tree marked on the one side with N and on the other side with a W, lying being and 
standing under the hills of the town of Broockland aforesaid in breadth and length of 
said piece or parcel of land with the same division line, soe as the lotts of Bedford 
aforesaid are layd out stretches soe far as the hay path from Bedford aforesaid to the 



96 

New lotts of Flatbush aforesaid and therein equal breadth with tlic other end before 
alongst the high path from Bedford aforesaid to the Xew Lotts of l-'hittbush aforesaid," 
etc. The consideration was one hundred and fifty pounds. 

Here the hay patli from licdford to Xew Lots is the Hunterrty road of later times 
and the reference to the parcel as having the same boundaries as the lots laid out at 
Bedford would seem to establish beyond any reasonable doubt in the mind of a reason- 
able man the fact that this path — the Ihmtcrfly road— provided tlie natural boundary 
of the Bedford plantations that were laid out under the Dutch sovereignty. 

Additional evidence is afforded under date of 1693 when the people of Brooklyn 
divided the common lands into three divisions. Reliable historians and surveyors agree 
that the dividing line between the first and second divisions was the Hunterfiy road, 
therein called the path of New Lots. The division is so shown on old maps. 

This coupled with the deed cited above and both considered in relation to the estab- 
lishment of the Village of Bedford and the grant along the "old path to the hay" seem 
to establish the identity and existence of the Hunterfly road, in Dutch days, as the suc- 
cessor of an Indian path that was in existence long before that period. 

Period of the British Sovereignty. 

It is, perhaps, beyond the scope of this report to follow the fortunes of the Hunter- 
fly road into the period of the British possession, having expressed the opinion that it 
was a Dutch road, but there occurs in this connection a point that may kindle the 
interest and arouse the ingenuity of legal minds. 

New Xethcrland was surrendered to the British September 8, 1664. The terms of 
surrender provided that the Dutch should continue to enjoy property rights, customs 
and divers other things, all of which came about as a result of a grant made by Charles 
II. to "our dearest Brother" James, the Duke of York. Charles II. was known as the 
merry monarch, which title was the result of certain amiable qualities. The royal 
attributes of the merry monarch did not, however, include any appreciable regard for 
the royal word and so it came about that the grant which Charles made to "our dearest 
brother" was dated r^Iarch 12. 1664, at which time the Dutch not oidy held the title, but 
actually occupied a considerable portion of the land which the merry monarch sought 
to bestow upon liis kinsman. A portion of the tract had already been granted to John 
Winthrop, but that is a mere incident. 

The practical effect was that Charles II. granted to the Duke of York something 
that did not belong to the Crown of England. To provide a shadow of legality to 
cover the land grabbing operations which the English engaged in at that time, it was 
claimed that England had secured title to all of America by right of discovery, because 
the Cabots and Frobisher had sailed along the coast. This claim was wholly at vari- 
ance with the recognized rule established by Queen Elizabeth, who declared that mere 
discovery without settlement carried no title. Had Charles been correct in his view, 
both the Spanish and French could have proved title prior to the English through the 
discoveries of Verrazano in 152,3, and a l-'rcnch trading settlement which existed in the 



97 

heart of the present New York in 1540; and the Spanish through Estervan Gomez 
who visited New York harbor in 1525. 

Acting under authority of this questionable grant, the Duke of York through 
Richard Nicols published a code known as the Duke's Laws. A convention at Hemp- 
stead went through the motions of ratifying this code, but they were not supported by 
the people and the delegates became so unpopular that it was necessary for the Court 
of Assizes to threaten with a fine anyone who should speak his opinion of the delegates. 

It is a well settled principle of internationa', law that the laws of a conquered country 
remain in full force and elifect until altered by the new sovereign. In other words, 
sovereignty may pass without in any wise affecting the established law. 

In view of the fact that all the authority under which the Duke's Laws were pro- 
mulgated, and, indeed, under which the whole proceeding was conducted, is found in 
the grant of land which did not belong to the grantor, were any of these acts legal 
and was the English law really established here before 1674, when by the provisions of 
the treaty which terminated the second occupation by the Dutch, New Y'ork was 
formally ceded to England? These are questions for legal minds to ponder. 

The foregoing may seem rather distant from the Hunterfly road, but the connect- 
ing link is here. On May 14, 1670, representatives of Brooklyn purchased from the 
Indians a tract of land which was bounded on one of its courses by the "port or en- 
trance" of a line of hills. While the searches to date are not entirely .satisfactory, there 
is reason to believe that this port or entrance may have been the Hunterfly road and 
if the Dutch law still prevailed at that time this would provide another link in the 
chain. The settlement of the point would also prove of value in the consideration of 
■other roads. 

It seems unnecessary to follow the history through later years. Advancement and 
enterprise are stretching their arms across the section traversed by this road and now 
but few traces remain of the ancient highway that felt the stealthy tread of the mocca- 
sin and the jolt of primitive wheels, but slumbering in the pages of forgotten yester- 
days is a story that leads back over the Hunterfly road to the dim period when the 
watch fires of the Indians first flung their ruddy flare across the dark waters of the bay. 

The Topographical Bureau of the Borough President's ofi^ice in Brooklyn reports 
that the following portions of the Hunterfly road have been closed : 

"The Commissioners of Highways of the Towns of Flatbush and New Lots, on 
March 6, 1877, closed that part of Hunterfly road lying north of Rapeljo .avenue (now 
Kiverdale avenue), and east of Rockaway avenue. 

"On March 23, 1863, the Commissioners of Highways of the Town of New Lots 
closed certain parts of the old Hunterfly road, and laid out other connections of the 
road in place of the portions closed in the territory bounded appro.ximately by East 
New York avenue, Barrett street, Dumont avenue and Tapscott street. 

"The papers and maps relating to the above two (2) items are on file in the office 
of the Commissioner of Records. 



98 

•'By an act of the Legislature, passed May 3, 1869 (chapter 506), all that part of 
Huntertly road which lies north of Herkimer street and south of Bainhridge street was 
discontinued and closed. 

"On page 42 of tlie l')rookI\n Conii)endiuin. there is a reference to the closing of 
Huntertly road, from Jamaica turnpike to the City line, to take effect whenever the 
eastern part of Fulton avenue and Howard avenue, from Fulton avenue south to the 
City line shall be opened and fit for travel. This item is probably taken from the report 
of the Commissioners appointed under the act of the Legislature to lay out streets, 
avenues, etc., in the City of Brooklyn (chapter 132 of the Laws of 1835). 

"Up to the present time, I have been unable to locate a copy of the report of these 
Commissioners, and it seems to me to be somewhat doubtful just what these Conimis- 
sioners did or intended should be done regarding these closings. The portion of the 
road closed by chapter 506 of the Laws of 1869 is included in the portion of the road 
referred to in the Conipendiimi." 

The records of the office of the Commissioner of Records in Kings Count\' do not 
show any additional proceedings closing portions of the road. 

The sum of those contained in the report of tlie Topographical Bureau docs not 
embrace the entire road. Two sections of considerable area have not, apparently, been 
declared closed by legal authority, and one section was laid out in 1863, to take the 
place of the original lines, hence that particular section was not Dutch. 

************ 

In the preparation of this report many authorities have been consulted, but I desire 
to properly acknowledge a special indebtedness to the office of the Commissioner of 
Records of Kings County, and the Topographical Bureau of the office of the Borough 
President of Brooklyn, for information and suggestions drawn from an extensive 
knowledge of the subject. 

I append a list of some of the authorities consulted: 

Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States. 

Gerard on Titles. 

O'Callaghan's History of New Netherland. 

Broadhead's History. 

Kurman's .'\ntiquities. 

Ostrander's History. 

Stile's History of Kings County. 

Publication of the Grolier Club. 

Fiske's Dutch and Quaker Colonics. 

Colonial Documents published by authority of the Secretary of State. 

Old maps, surveys and documents. 

Various general and local histories and legal papers. 



Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Claims. 







.V*^ 



HUNTERFLY ROAD 



Department of Finance, Rureaii for the Examination of Claims. 




h 



HUNTERFLY ROAD 



I03 



KINGS HIGHWAY. 

Length, 9.4. Exclusive of Brooklyn, Flatbush and Jamaica Turnpike. Total 
Length, 13.7 Miles. Intersects 259 Blocks. 

Every road worthy of the name, and many tliat were not, has doubtless been known 
at some period of its history as the Kings highway. Tliis was, of course, intended as 
a mark of respect to the reigning sovereign, and when that dignitary happened to be 
a woman the Kings highway became the Queens highway. 

Development and settlement gave local names to various sections of roads once 
called by a common name, and so it happens tliat while many roads to-day have an 
individuality of their own they were once called the Kings highway. 

Of the road under consideration it may be said that, roughly speaking, the part 
now known as Kings highway connected Midvvotit (Flatbush) with New .Amersfort 
(Flatlands), then swept south and went to New Utrecht and so westerly toward the 
shore. There is some doubt as to just where the road touched the shore line, whether 
in the neighborhood of Nyack Point (Fort Hamilton) or in the neighborhood of Yellow 
Hook on the upper bay. 

That the Kings highway is one of the oldest roads within the borders of Kings 
County there can be very little doubt. In early times roads always connected objective 
points, such as settlements, waterways, etc. It will be seen that the Kings highway 
was a bond connecting the earliest settlements, hence its age should be computed from 
the time when such settlements were made. The towns connected' by this road were 
settled between 1636 and 1657, all during the period of the Dutch sovereignty here, so it 
would not seem to leave much doubt that the Kings highwa.v, so called, was originally 
a Dutch road. 

There is considerable evidence to prove this. Dr. Strong, in his history of Flat- 
bush, published with Stile's "History of Kings County," refers to the road as an Indian 
path in the following : 

(Stiles, volume I, page 214, "History of Town of I'latbush," by Dr. Strong.) 
"The first houses or settlements were probably in the most southerly portion of the 
present village, along the Indian path from New Amersfort to the hills, now the direct 
road through the village from Flatlands to Brooklyn. We have but little positive 
knowledge concerning the number or the names of the first settlers, or the locations 
secured by them betv;een the first purchase of 163-I and the patent of 1651. But Dr. 
Strong states that after the patent of 165 1 'farms were laid out into 48 lots or tracts 
of land extending 600 Dutch rods east and west on each side of the Indian path and 
having severally an average width of 27 rods.' " 



I04 

Governor Stiiyvcsanl on JiiiK- .;. 1654. issued the followiii!; gram in wliich the road 
is ealled the highway : 

(Book H. N., translations from the Dutch at page 11.') 

"Pctrus Stuyvesant, on behalf of their High Mightiness, the Lords States General 
of the I'nited Fatherland and the Noble Lords Managers of the Incorporated West 
India Company, Director General of New Netherland, Curacao and the Islands thereof 
with the Noble Lords of the Council, Declare that we on the day of the date under- 
written have given and granted unto Arent Van Hatten a certain parcel of land lying 
on Long Island in the Town of Midwant, on the east side of the Highway adjoining 
on the south side the land of David Provost, on the east and north the Highway; is in 
length 300 rods, in breadth 100 rods — as much as is enclosed by posts and rails — Upon 
express conditions and stipulations etc. 

"Done at Ainsterdani in New Netherland, the 4tli of June, 1654." 

On December 26, 1661, Governor Stuyvesant in the following patent refers to the 
road as "Tlie Cross Road" : 

(New L'trecht Records B, page 28.) 

'"Thomas Jansen, on the 26th of December, anno 1661, was granted by the then 
Governor Petrus Stuyvesant to Thomas Jansen a parcel of land, situate on Long Island 
around the town of New Uytrecht on the northwest side of Rutger Joosten, on th» 
southeast side of Tennis Idensc division line on either side northeast as well as easterly, 
long six hundred rods, wide four and' twenty rods, large four and twenty morgens ; a 
home lot on the northwest side of Claes Claessen, on the southwest side of the Cross 
Road wide twelve rods, long five and tv/enty rods ; wliicli deed on this day the 28th of 
October 1677 was shown to the constable and Overseers of the Town who, in recogni- 
tions of the truth have signed with their own hands hereunder. 

llenderick Matyen 

Smack (This is the mark of 

Luj-kes Mayers, Constable, 
with own hand placed. 

Jan Vandeventer, 
Known to me 

Michel Hainelle, 

Clerk." 

In i'jSj Crackewasco. Arrenopeah, .Mamikto and .Anen.yev. Indians, as true owners 
of the land, made a conveyance of their right, title and interest in the following: 

(Stiles History, volume i, page t62. History of Gravesend.) 

"In 1684 Crackewasco. Arrenopeah, Mamekto and Annenges, the true proprietors 
of land called M.ikcopaca. made a conveyaice offering a former conveyance of the 
foilowina : 



I05 

"Beginning at the most eastward end of the Beach called by the Indians iMeoung, 
bounded on the westmost side by the land heretofore purchased from Chippahig, and 
on the eastward side by the creek commonly called Strome Kill, and soe along from the 
head of said creek, through the middle of the meadow and valley till they come to a 
white oak tree standing by the Flatland Wagon Path, and soe running to another white 
oak tree standing by the Utrecht wagon path, etc. 

"This was a confirmation of Indian deeds of 1645, 1650 and 1654." 

All these documents have been carefully examined and considered by the experts 
in the office of the Commissioner of Records of Kings County, and they identify the 
road referred to as the Kings highway. The following communication from the Com- 
missioner of Records shows the Kings highway to be a Dutch road, and also those 
portions that have been closed by lawful authority: 

"It was called 'The Highway' in a patent from Governor Stuyvesant to Jochem 
Garritsen Cook, May 27, 1656. See Colonial Document, volume 14, page 349. Also 
called 'The Highway' in a patent from Governor Stuyvesant to Bruyn Barentsen, Octo- 
ber 4, 1658. See Colonial Document 14, page 425. 

"The above patents were in vicinity of the old Brooklyn Church. 

"In a patent to Arent Van Hattum, of Flatbush. June 4, 1654, as found in O'Calla- 
han's New Netherland, it was also called 'The Highway.' 

"In New Utrecht Town Records, volume B, page 28, it was called 'The Cross 
Road' in a patent to Thomas Jansen, December 26, 1661. 

"From above authorities we conclude the road to be of Dutch origin. 

"Lacking specific information as to the particular portion of Kings highway as 
being closed, I quote authorities for such portions as are accessible. 

"Under .Schedule E. page 42, Brooklyn Compendium, chapter 132, Laws 1835, Flat- 
bush turnpike (Kings highway), from Jamaica turnpike to City line, is closed when 
Flatbush avenue is opened. 

"Lender Schedule K, page 82, Brooklyn Compendium, chapter 483, Laws i860, Flat- 
bush road (Kings highway), between Hanson place, .\tlantic avenue. Canton street and 
Flatbush avenue, not required for the extension of Felix street, is closed. 

"In Flatlands (Thirty-second Ward) the Commissioners of Highways, by resolution 
May II, 1894, closed the old road (Kings highway) between Avenue K and Magaws 
lane. 

"In New Utrecht (Thirtieth Ward) the Board of Estimate closed Kings highway, 
from Seventh avenue to Eleventh avenue. See map in Register's office, filed Octo- 
ber 9, 1903. 

"Same ward. Kings highway, between Fourteenth avenue and Eighty-first street, 
was closed by Board of Estimate February 8, 1004. See map in Register's office. 



Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination nf Cla 




Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Claims. 




Department ..f Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Claims. 




V 

KINCSHICHWAV 



Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Claims 



UUUb, 




mnmnni 



BKUYN, GRCENWOOD 6. BATH R Fl 



F-F»OIV\ F-U/^T-BUSH TO NEW UTFICCHT 




ESRUYNES UA^MI 



KiNfflSHIQHWAY. 



ir 



I 



Department of Finance. Tinreaii for tlie Examination of Claims. 




117 



KINGSBRIDGE ROAD. 



Permit me to state at the outset that I am far from satisfied that the references 
which now seem to fix the origin of the road are the earliest that will be found upon 
a thorough examination of early records. This is a work that will take years, but in 
my opinion it should be undertaken at once, for the longer it is delayed the more 
difficult will it become. That, however, is apart from the subject. 

Kingsbridge is a name that is closely allied to the history of upper Manhattan 
and The Bronx. The bridge whence comes the name appears to have been an itin- 
erant sort of structure, which was located at various points along Spuyten Duyvil 
Creek. 

Tlie original liritlgc was buii* in 1605 by Frederick Phillips, who had patented 
vast areas of land in Westchester County. This structure crossed Spuyten Duyvil 
just west of the present line of Broadway, and the Kingsbridge road stretched 
away from the bridge. Tlic original piers which supported this ancient structure 
are standing to-day. The Kingsbridge road of the present day, which includes 
most of the bed of the old road, still leads to the bridge. "Valentine's Manuel of 
the Common Council" (1862, at page 518) says of the Kingsbridge road: "This 
was an ancient mad and was the post road for New England. It was resurveyed 
in 1707 and new courses in some places were laid down," etc. The fact that the 
road was resurveyed in 1707 would indicate that it was of some age at that tmie 
;Mid uf considerable importance. 

"Valentine's Manual" (1856, at page 474), under the caption of Spikendivil, says: 
"This name has been recently more generaly known as Spuyten Duyvil, but the 
former is the orthography at the earliest mention we find of it in the records, which 
occurs in 1695, or nearly one hundred and sixty-five years since. At that time a 
proposition was made to build a bridge over it. The privilege which was. in the 
first instance, granted by the Legislature to The City of New York, but was sur- 
rendered by the Corporation to Frederick Phillips, who became about that time the 
patenter of a great part of Westchester County, and who was about establishing his 
residence on his manor and leasing out his lands. The bridge was a necessary way of 
communication by land with the City. It was about that time that Kingsbridge road 
was laid out through the wooded hill along the northerly part of Manhattan Island." 
Another reference which shows that the road was well established in 1704 is the 
"Journal of Madam Knight" of her trips from New Haven to New York. This is 
quoted in "New York and Albany Post road from Kingsbridge to the ferry at 
Crawlier over against Albany." Charles G. Hine, 1905. Following is a quotation 
from the Journal: 

"Spitting Divil— also Kingsbridge— where they pay three pence for passing over 
with a horse, which the man that keeps the gate set up at the end of the bridge re- 
ceives." 



Il8 

The iiiimitcs of tlic Gminion Council also afford some early reference to Kings- 
bridge. It ai-pcars from these minutes that from January l6, 1699. unl 1 January 25. 
1700, the City fathers were engrossed in a controversy between one Jasper Nessepott 
and John Marsh. Jasper desired to erect a mill at Kingsbridge and applied to the 
Common Council for permission. On January 16. 1699. the Council named a com- 
mittee composed of .Mderman D. Peyster, .\lderman Clock, Mr. Brasier and Mr. Tie- 
bout, to view the place and report "whether the erecting of the said mill will hinder 
the passage of boats and sloo])s round this island, and whether it will be convenience 
to grant him liberty to erect a mill thereon and make reports thereof to the next 
Common Council." (Min. C. C. Meeting of Jan. 16, 1699-1700. vol. 2. p. 97-) 

The Committee reported favorably and recommended that permission be granted 
••on condition that he take out of the way the stones and rocks on the other side 
thereof that the same may not hinder the passage of Boats and Canaws and when 
any is to pass att their Reasonable Request he is to shutt his Sluices and on the 
oher side 01 the bridge erect A post in the water and have a Rope ready to assist 
them in passing. Which Report is approved." 

Up to this point things looked rather rosy for Jasper, but even at the same meet- 
ing clouds began to gather. The minutes of the Common Council record that a peti- 
tion from John Marsh was read, in which he prayed that he be made a party to the 
grant. This was on the ground that Jasper was not the original mill man, but that 
he (Marsh) was the first projector thereof. On February 19, 1699, the Council lis- 
tened to arguments and decided that they would make the grant to Nesspot and 
Marsh jointly, provided Marsh should observe all the covenants agreed to by Nesspot. 
The combination did not last long, lor on September 24, 1700 (vol. 2, p. 113I, a 
committee composed of Alderman Bayvanke, Mr. Tiebout and Mr. Mesier was named 
to adjust the amount that Nesspot should pay Marsh "for his Projection contrivance 
and work done at the Mill att Kingsbridge," and. further, that should Nesspot comply 
with all conditions the mill should be his. On January 25. 1700 (vol, 2, p. 1,34), the 
committee reported that Jasper should pay twelve pounds to Marsh and should have 
the mill and so ended the trouble, apparently. 

If there was sufficient business at Kingsbridge for a mill, it seems hardly necessary 
to reason that there was a road leading to it, for while much of the traffic might have 
been by water, a considerable portion was doubtless by wagon. 

On September 12, 1771, the Committee on Roads was ordered to confer with the 
Mayor of Westchester concerning the ■'reparation" of the Kings Bridge. (Vol. 7- 

There is basis for the belief that there was a road from New Amsterdam to Harlem 
in the Dutch days for there was traffic between the settlements. There is also authority 
for the statement that the f^rst bridge over Spuyten Duyvil was built by the Hutch, but 
this authority owes its prominence to literarv charm r.ather than historical accuracy. 



119 

When New Amsterdam was beset by enemies, stubborn old Peter Stuyvesant resolved 
to fight. He needed re-enforcements and determined to arouse the patriotism of the 
solid citizens in the settlements along the Hudson. The courier selected by the 
Governor was Jan Van Corlear who was fond of dining often and well. It is related 
that Van Corlear started forth with a goodly flask of Hollands as a companion and 
hastened to awake the patriots of Harlem, Sleepy Hollow. Tarrytown and other peace- 
ful villages. When Van Corlear reached the stream separating Manhattan from the 
mainland, a terrific thunderstorm was raging and the water was racing between the 
banks, whipped to a seething foam by the fury of the storm. Van Corlear halted. He 
must cross. There was no bridge. Caressing the bottle of Hollands he swore that he 
would cross the stream "in spite of the devil." In he plunged and swam bravely for 
a while but was overcome. Just before he sank, Van Corlear sounded a long blast on 
his horn and this was the signal for spirits of the storm to gather and mock hiin. So 
impressed were the farmers by this tragedy and so thoroughly frightened, that in order 
to defeat the evil spirit of the waters, they built a bridge over them. Thus did the 
valiant Van Corlear by an oath give a lasting name to the boiling creek, bnt even unto 
this day the sound of Van Corlear's horn is heard when summer storms are booming 
along the hills. 

A description of that portion of the Kingsbridge road within the borders of Man- 
hattan, written by John Randel, Jr., Secretary, Surveyor and Chief Engineer to 
the Commissioners of Streets and Roads, who laid out the plan of the City, is contained 
in Valentine's Manual (1864, pages 853, 854, 855). This is especially valuable because 
of the detail in which distances are given. Following is the description : 

"The Kingsbridge road commenced at the crossing of the middle road by the 
eastern post road at Ninetieth and Ninety-second streets ; and continued along the 
eastern post road through the barrier gate at McGowans Pass to Harlem lane, near 
One Hundred and Eighth street, where it diverged ■eastwardly to Harlem ; it thence 
continued along the lane over Harlem flat to Meyer's corner, about 67 yards west of 
Eighth avenue at One Hundred and Thirty-first street, passing in its route along 
Harlem lane, the residence of Valentine Nutter in Sixth avenue, between One Hundred 
and Ninth and One Himdred and Tenth streets; it thence passed 73 yards west of 
the southwest corner of Harlem square which was laid out on the Commissioner's plan 
from One Hundred and Seventeenth to One Hundred and Twenty-first street, and from 
Sixth to Seventh avenue, and contained eighteen and one-tenth acres: crossed the road 
leading from Manhattanvillc to Harlem at One Hundred and Twenty-fifth street, be- 
tween Eighth and Ninth avenues and east of the Manhattanvillc Academy at One 
Hundred and Twenty-sixth street and Tenth avenue. From Meyer's corner the Kings- 
bridge road continued northward between Eighth and Ninth avenues to its intersection 
with the Bloomingdale road at Ninth avenue, between One Hundred and Forty-sixth 
and One Hundred and Forty-seventh streets; passing in its route from Meyer's corner 
west of the country residence of Cadwalader D. Colden, who was mayor of the city in 



I20 

the years i8iS, 1819 and i8jo, slaiidiiig in Seventh avenue, between One Hundred and 
Thirty-ninth and One Hundred and Fortieth streets passing Bussings Point road, 133 
yards west of Eighth avenue, between One Hundred and Forty-third and One Hun- 
dred and Forty-fourth streets; then ascending Bradhurst Hill west of a revolutionary 
redoubt at One Hundred and Forty-fifth street, and connected with the Blooming- 
dale road, ten \ards cast of Ninth avenue, between One Hundred and Forty-sixth and 
One Hundred and Forty-seventh streets; this Kingsbridge road thence passed the 
ten mile stone, the southern side of which is described in the Gjinmissioner's report 
as 'being touched al tlie surface of the ground liy the southern side of One Hundred and 
Fifty-third street;' tlicnce past 120 yards west of the residence of Mme. Jumel, the 
widow of Stephen Jumel, and afterwards the widow of Col. Aaron Burr, standing 150 
yards east of Tenth avenue, between One Hundred and Sixtieth and One Hun- 
dred and Sixty-iirst streets. At One Hundred and Sixty-first street the road passed 
east of and opposite to Mount Washington Spring at Eleventh avenue, and redoubts, 
etc. From Eleventh to Twelfth avenue, at One Hundred and Seventy-fifth to One 
Hundred and Seventy-sixth street, the road passed fifty-seven yards east of Twelfth 
aveiuie and 900 yards east of a fort and redoubt on a point of rocks on Hudson's 
River about thirty yards south of One Hundred and Seventy-sixth street and 200 
yards west of Fourteenth avenue. From this point to the wharf at Fort Lee Ferry 
was 1,950 yards, and to the opposite shore of the Hudson River, foot of the Palisades, 
was 1,267 yards, as measured by triangulation in 1821. At One Hundred and Eighty- 
third street the road was forty-three yards east of Twelfth avenue and 343 yards 
east of Fort Washington on Thirteenth avenue. At One Hundred and Ninety-second 
street the road was thirty-three yards west of Twelfth avenue and 533 yards west 
of Fort George. At One Hundred and Ninety-sixth street the road was 133 yards 
east of Thirteenth avenue and 233 yards east of Fort Tryon. At Two Hundred and 
Sixth street the road crossed the west side of Twelfth avenue and was 730 yards east 
of Tubby Hook Point and Hudson's River, from which point the oblique distance 
across that river to Norman's cottage on the New Jersey shore was 1,570 yards, as 
measured by triangulation in 1821. Between Two Hundred and Eighth and Two Hun- 
dred and Ninth streets, this road was opposite the residence of Jacobus Dyckman and 
150 yards west of Eleventh avenue. From Two Hundred and Thirteenth to Two 
Hundred and Seventeenth street the road passed along the foot of the eastern slope of 
marble quarries. At Two Hundred and Sixteenth street the road w-as thirty-three 
yards west of Tenth avenue and 1,070 yards east of Cock Hill Fort on high ground 
between Spuyten Duyvil (Spiteing DeviU Creek and Hudson's River. At Twenty- 
second street the road crossed the canal, cut across New York Island from Harlem 
River to Spuyten Duyvil Creek. At Two Hundred and Twenty-sixth street the road 
was 150 yards east of Fort Prince Charles on Tenth avenue at the southerly side of 
that street. .'\t Two Hundred and Twenty-eighth street and Tenth avenue where the 
most northerly monument on New York Island was placed by mc, Kingsbridge road 
was about thirty-four yards cast of that avenue ; and McCombs' Mill below the Harlem 



121 

River, and along the west side of Kingsbridge, was about seventeen yards of that most 
northerly monument." 

There is one other matter to which I desire to draw your attention. It applies 
not only to this road but to all the so-called English roads in which the City is sup- 
posed to have only an easement and not a fee. While it is true that land may have 
been taken from individuals for the purposes of constructing roads, it is also true 
that these same individuals were doubtless compensated for the land, even as they 
are to-day in cases where the City acquires land in fee to lay out a street. An illus- 
tration of such a proceeding in the early days may be found in the laying out of the 
road to Harlem, i66g, 167 1, 1672. In this case, commissioners were appointed and 
appraised the land taken at twenty guilders per road (see Gerard, Water Rights, Roads, 
etc., page 303). The question whether statutory provision was made for adequate 
compensation for lands taken for these old roads, belongs rather to the legal branch 
of the question and will doubtless receive very thorough investigation in the Law De- 
partment, so no attempt is made here to trace the statutory provisions. 

On May 25, 1903, proceedings were confirmed in the matter of acquiring title to 
Kingsbridge road from Webster avenue to Harlem River in the Twenty-fourth Ward 
of the Borough of The Bronx. In this proceeding a large portion of old Kingsbridge 
road was included within the lines of the new road and an award of one dollar was 
made to unknown owners. From this it would seem that no private individuals claimed 
any substantial interest in tlie road, and in view of this it seems not unreasonable to 
assume that the City owned it. 

Following is the statement of the Engineer of Street Openings, Borough of Man- 
hattan, contained in a letter of the Commissioner of Public Works, made in answer to 
inquiry as to whether Bloomingdale, Kingsbridge and the old Boston Post roads were 
ever closed in whole or in part by lawful authority: 

"I know of no legal closing of these roads. The custom of the Commissioners 
appointed before the year i860 in opening all streets and avenues crossing these roads, 
to close the road and divide the property equally and award these parts to the abutting 
property owners, if it fell within the block lines to assess the area as private property 
for damage in the opening to be paid by the party receiving such land. I would sug- 
gest an examination of the taking of title to the Road or Public Drive now called 
Broadway from West Thirty-second street northerly to the end of Spuyten Duyvil 
Creek, also the part of Bloomingdale road now taken for Riverside drive and Park. 
This information should be in the office of the County Clerk and the Comptroller's 
office." 



Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Claim? 










■ L.V-> ^g ^' ^ *; 
















\y 




/V; 















^,>0^^ 




rs 






KI.Nl.SBKIDtiE KUAU. 



Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Claims. 










WiTp- 



fant 









it-^-t 



■tt, - 'f f: 



cs 



-m 



"^ — ^ 









■^i 



jiJ\ ii 



■ ^-ii/it- 








..t£*-^\ 



KINGSBRIDGE ROAD. 



Department of Finance, liurcau for tlie Examination nf Claims. 




KIN(iS]!I<ll)C;E HOAD. 



Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Claims. 



,• ! L-^-^l'lTxi— - : V ' ''L__ 




-4^,^, :;<=;;,,^^^-S^- 



-?/ 



,ci:juz:^,li- 



KINGSBKIUGE ROAD 



Dc|)ai tiiicTil of I'iiiancc, Uurcau for llic Examination of Claims. 



^-3^:^:3^-— M_j. 













KINGSBRIDGE KOAI). 



Depailiiiein of Finance, liurcau for llie Examinalion of Claims. 




fyr^' ' — — .ft* y — 



:;^i^i^S 



,,.„JiCIiII]t 






'ZJC 



3^^-1n 



KINGSBRIDGE ROAD. 



Department ef I-'inanec, I'.urean i>T I'le l-"\riniinati(in nf C'aiin^ 




sev^tnTH 



SIXTH 



F-(FTH 



F"c=U RTH 



t _ 1 t« J t_ , . , 



IJL1.UUL 



n"T^ffl"hnnra|]nn1 




- (S»sjs^^ ^ PI ji-^ n .?> P 



i; 






a^C.-' 



\' 



ave: 



SECOND 



Ave^ 



KINGSBKIUGE ROAD. 



Dc-pai'tiiK-Mil of Finance, Biiriau fur the Examination cf Claims, 



X 




'\ 




\ 

i 




\ 


I 


/ ■ 


> 


/ 


2^ 


/ 


Z 



7 ; ! 









10 \ ' ■•• 






.(■/■,,■ 

,17 









^ 



KINGSBRIDGE KUAL). 



Department of Finance. Bureau for the Examination of Claims. 




KING.SUKIDGE ROAD. 



Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Claims. 



\ 



L. 



/ 



J 



, \ i'l-nw! 



,\\l/' 



j Fori Tvv 




) ,, flu lie;/''/-' 



KIxXGSBRIDGE ROAD 



Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Claims 



A_ 



I ! 




KINGSBRIDGE ROAD. 



■45 
KYCKOUT ROAD. 

Length, 3.9 Miles. Intersects 98 Blocks. 

The data available at the present time which bears on the earlj- history of this 
road is rather sparse, but it is quite evident from the works of rehable historians that 
the road was in existence at a very early date during the period of the Dutch occupa- 
tion here. 

The name is one that bespeaks in a measure of the character of the highway. 
Kyckout, Kickout, Keikout, etc., for the name is variously spelled, means "lookout." 
The significance in connection with the road under discussion is this: In the very 
early days when Bushwick was but a cluster of huts and the country immediately sur- 
rounding it was a dense wood, there was considerable danger from the Indians. It is 
also a matter of record that the paleface brothers did not live together in the unsel- 
fish tranquility that those who sigh for the good old times would lead one to believe. 
So in order that the village and the settlers might not be entirely unprepared in case 
of attack, they established the lookout. This stood originally on the brow of a high 
bluff wliich was located just about where the Brooklyn tower of the Williamsburg 
Bridge stands now. 

From the village of Bushwick to this lookout there was a road and this road was 
known as the road to tlie lookout or the Kyckout road. On the 14th of !\Iarch, in 1661, 
Governor Stuyvesant visited Bushwick, and, it may be remarked incidentally, the place 
was not Bushwick until after the Governor arrived, for it was on that visit tliat he 
gave the place its name. While the Governor was there, the citizens applied to him for 
certain privileges. The third prayer of this petition read as follows: 

"To have roads for the purpose of going to the river and kills, to wit : One road, 
between the land of Hendrick Willemse Baker and Jan Connel ; the second upon 
Dirck Volkertsen (the) Normans Land, which is named the Woodpoint; the third over 
(Jacob) Steendams Land to come to Mispat Kill; the fourth over Albert de Normans 
Land to get hay and other things." 

This quotation is taken from Stiles' history of Brooklyn, which quotes the pethion 
in full. The original appears to have been lost, according to the authorities in the 
office of the Commissioner of Records in Kings County. Inquiry there as to whether 
his experts regarded the Kyckout as a Dutch road brought the following reply : 

"In reply to yours * * * vvould say that we have always considered this road 
to be of Dutch origin. The records of the old town of Bushwick, bearing upon the 
roads therein, were lost some seven years ago, or rather disappeared from the County 
Clerk's oflfice ; hence we cannot refer you to them, but you will find extracts from them 
in Stiles' History of Brooklyn, Volume 2, page 329, which lead us to the above con- 
clusion." 



146 

The name Kyckout grew in popular favor, and later the water-front in the locality 
and also the Kyckout farm, were so named. The Kyckout farm was held originally 
by one Jean Mescrole and for many generations remained in the Meserole family 
and the various branches tliereof. The original Meserole built a house on the Kyckout 
bluff and in later years this became one of the favorite resorts of Captain William 
Kidd, who might be called the pirate with a press agent. 

Dr. Stiles in his hostory of Kings County, speaking of the Kyckout farm, describes 
. its partition, and says : 

"There remained, however, a road or bridle path known as the 'Keikout road,' 
which seems to have dated from the very beginning of the settlement. It ran from the 
side of the village laid out around the old Bushwick Church, and down near the present 
North Second street to Tenth, near Union avenue. Then, turning southerljs and with 
various zigzags, now- touching the present Ninth street, and again further south, inter- 
secting Tenth street diagonally, it came to the present Broadway, near Ninth street, 
at the old Brooklyn line. It again turned west along or near said line, about a rod in 
width, to the shore of the East River. Then, turning northerly along the East River, 
it extended to Bushwick Creek, then 'Normans Kill.' It was doubtless a Pent road 
with gates of bars, separating the different farms through which it passed." 

Under date of March 24, 1662, the people of Bushwick complained to Governor 
Stuyvesant in the following manner : 

"The community of Boswyck find that the road formerly made around two swamps 
to reach the water is a quarter of a league longer than necessary, so that this road is 
of no use in times of war, for the owners of land threaten us (although the Director 
General granted us this wood), and take it by force and obstruct every passage to it. 
We find it is done out of hatred and we therefore request the Commissaries that the 
road shall run at the west end of the village one rod outside of the gate, right along 
the meadows, towards the old stubble field on the hill, to the spring of the water 
course, thence along the land of Henderyck the baker and Barent Gerretsen, so along 
the meadows and then in a straight line to the road to the woods. This is requested 
by the undersigned persons on the 24th of March, 1662." Signed by Elberhardt Heede- 
man and eighteen others. 

The road referred to in the foregoing is believed by the experts of the Commis- 
sioner of Record's office to be the Kyckout road. 

The question of what portions have been closed liy lawful authority presents some 
difference of opinion. The Commissioner of Records has expressed the opinion thai 
the road was closed by chapters 123 and 132 of the Laws of 1835, and chapter 384, 
Laws of 1854, but adds ''we are unable to find any official action or report of the 
closing of the same." 

The Topographical Bureau of the Borough President's office in Brooklyn reports 
as follows, on the closing of the road : 



147 

"I have found no records of the closing of this road under the name of the Kickout 
road. I have, however, a record of the closing of an 'Old Road,' which may be a 
portion of or all of the Kickout road in the village of Williamsburgh. This road is 
described as being near Tenth street (Keap street) and was closed by the trustees of 
the village of Williamsburgli, on August i8, 1851, with the exception of such portions 
as are included in the streets of said village." 

To this may be added the statement that during an examination conducted in this 
office one of the petitioners was asked when the road was closed and replied that it 
was in 1852. Asked on what authority this statement was based, replied that it was on 
the authority of a statement made to him by the Lawyers' Title Company. 

All of which is respectfully submitted. 



Dcpaitiiicnt of Finance. Durcan for llie Exaiiiinatiun of C'ainis. 




COMMON HIGHWAY 
BETWEEIM 

woF?TMAN a de:f"orest. 



-®^- 



KYCKOUT ROAD 



Department of Finance. Bureau for the Examination of Claims. 




153 
LOTTS OR LITTLE LANE. 

Length, 1.5 Miles. Intersects 41 Blocks. 

This road ccnnectcd the main road with what was known as the road from 
FUubnsh to New Utrecht in the days of the Dntch sovereignty. A part of the lane 
is still open and in use as a public highway. 

In Dutch days this lane provided something of a short cut from Flatbush to New 
Utrecht and the shores of Gravcsend Bay. The bay was then a place of much activity 
because of the valuable shore and water industries. 

The Court minutes of Flatbush, under date of December IS. 1662, contain the fol- 
lowing entry ; 

"Lubbert Lubberts asks for a house lot in this town Midwout, on the west side 
of said towne, on the south side of the road and on the west side of the cross road, 
wide 6 rods, long 16. 

"The request of Lubbert Lubberts was granted by sheriff and judges." 

From the foregoing description and others in the locality, the property has been 
located by the searchers of the office of the Commissioner of Records in Ivings County 
and ''the road'' mentioned was what is now known as Lotts lane. 

In the year following— on March 30, 1663— Jan Cornelessen Van Tassel offered 
security for the payment of a horse that lie had purchased some time previous from 
Jan Eevers Bout. In the acknowledgment Van Tassel declared that he was "clearly 
indebted to the worthy Jan Eevers Bout to the extent of SO bu. good marketable rye 
arising from purchase of a horse tliat I acknowledge to have received, which I prom- 
ise to pav at Christmas next, anno 1663, exacllv and to satisfy the same I pledge my 
person and property, especially my farm situated at Midwout, on the north side of the 
road, and on the south side of Alber Krenick which I place under dbligation not to 
diminish or alienate the same before or untill that I have satisfied the above mentioned 
Jan Eevers Bout." All of which was done before Wellem Jacobs van Borm and Hen- 
drick Korcss, judges of the town of Midwout. 

Thus, Van Tassel's farm is definitely located as lying between Lotts lane and the 
Krenick farm. The Polhemus farm was just across the road to the south, so Lotts 
lane formed the b.jundary between them. 

In view of the foregoing, there does not seem to be room for any reasonable 
doubt that Lotts lane is a Dutch road. 

From the records of Topographical Bureau it appears that on November 9. 1891, 
Lotts lane, from Ocean parkway to Coney Island avenue, was closed. On December 
31, 1903, Lotts lane, from Ocean parkway to East Second street, was closed. 

That portion of the old road from Flatbush avenue to Coney Island avenue 
lies wholly within the lines of the present Avenue C, so no question in connection 
wich releases is likely to arise in this section. That portion from East Second street 
westv/ard is still in use. 



Department o£ Finance. Bureau for the Examination of C'aims. 




157 
NEWTOWN AND BUSHWICK TURNPIKE. 

Length, 3.5 Miles. Intersects 72 Blocks. 

History has not told liow tliis road first came into existence, but, like many of the 
old roads, it was doutless developed from an Indian path. 

This road should be considered from two points of view, as the highway and as 
the turnpike ; for what was known in later years as the Brooklyn and Newtown 
turnpike embraced an old highway in the Bushwick section and the Cripplebush road, 
which tapped the Bedford section. The road was one really connecting Newtown 
with Bedford and points on the Jamaica road, and names such as Cripplebush were 
localisms applied to certain sections. While the line between Bedford and Cripplebush 
was known as the Cripplebush road, the highway was continuous from Newtown to 
Bedford. This is a point that should be kept constantly in mind when considering 
the subject of old roads. Present or popular names applied to particular highways 
would lead to a hopeless end if one were to seek references in the early records to 
names that are familiar now. The reason is simple. Often a highway would have no 
special title that would be called merely "the road." At a later period some local 
name might be applied to the same highw-ay, as, for instance, "Cripplebush," and 
thereafter it would be known as the Cripplebush road. From this it may be seen 
that a road is often very much older than its name. Hence, while this highway is 
often referred to as Cripplebush road and Brooklyn and Newtown turnpike, it is 
more accurate to describe it as the road from Bedford to Newtown. 

The legal status of this road was recently considered by the Appellate Division 
of the Second Department in the case of Caminez & Goodman (Advance Sheets for 
September, 1907. pages 484 to 488). The Court held unanimously that if the road 
was Dutch the fee was in the City and the Court then decided from certain historical 
references that the road was Dutch. The opinion written by Mr. Justice Gaynor 
follows : 

"If the old road was a Dutch road the fee of it was in the City, after the law 
of the Continent of Europe, and its conveyance to the plaintiff's predecessors was good 
(Dunham vs. Williams, 37 N. Y., 251). The capitulation of Long Island by the Dutch 
to the English was in 1664. If the road existed at that time the plaintiff's case is 
made out. It is mentioned in Riker's Aimals of Newtown (pages 83 and 84) as having 
been repaired in 1670, showing it to have been of some age then ; and in Ostrander's 
History of Brooklyn (Volume I, pages loi and 102) it is mentioned as existing in 
1662, when the Village of Bedford was laid out. It is therefore called the 'Cripple- 
bush road running to Newtown,' As Bedford was between Brooklyn and Newtown 
and Cripplebush road between Bedford and Newtown, and there was only one high- 
way from Brooklyn to Newtown, the identity of the road seems not to be open to 
dispute." 



158 

There arc iither references which possihly escaped tlic attention of the learned 
Judge, for the ancient records show that this Iiighway was known hy llie following 
titles: "Iiighway running from the Kill-Kulls." "Old Highway and Most Ancient 
Higliway," i6-)8; "■ Valley or Highway," 1654 ;, "Valley or Path," 1654-55; "Het Kenis 
Paot" (the cross roads), \(6i ; "The Road," 1662. If the road was regarded as "an 
old highway and most tincieiit higliway" in 164,^ it is hardly necessary to seek the 
origin. 

The life of the turnpike appears to date from 1S14. The following laws relating 
to it have been found: 

(iciu-itil Provisions. 
Date, March 2-,, Laws of 1814, Chapter 7J. 

Incorporated the Newtown and Bushwick Road Turnpike Company for the pur- 
pose of "making" a good and sufficient turnpike road from the west end of the road 
of the Flushing and Newtown Turnpike Bridge and Road Company, in the County 
of Queens, to the east end of the road of the Wallahout and Brooklyn Toll Bridge 
Company, in the County of Kings. 

Date, April u; Laws of 1815, Chapter 175. 
Amended chapter 72 of 1814 as to rates of toll. The company complained that 
stock could not he sold with toll rates as they were originally fixed. 

Date .\pril 12; Laws of 1816, Chapter 122. 
.Xmended original act by authorizing the appointment of two new directors to 
replace two deceased. 

Date, .\pril 4; Laws of 18,33, Chapter 104. 
Amended original act by authorizing five directors instead of seven, three of the 
five to constitute a quorum. 

To sum up : The road from Bedford to Newtown, variously known as the 
Brooklyn and Newtown turnpike, the Bushwick and Newtown turnpike, the Cripple- 
bush road, etc., as a Dutch road, and has been so designated by the unanimous bench 
of the Appellate Division of the Second Department. In addition to the authorities 
cited in the opinion of the Court, there are others showing the road to be one of great 
antiquity. 



Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Claims. 




BROOKLYN ©.NEWTOWN TURNF»JKE.. 



Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Claims. 




ROOKLVN a NCWTOWW 
TURNPIKE. 



clove: f? o/\ o 



i63 
WOODPOINT ROAD. 

Length, 2.7 Miles. Intersects 55 Blocks. 

This road traversed the old Biishwick section. It began at about Conselyea and 
Humboldt streets and followed a crooked course to the head of Normans Kill (Bush- 
wick Creek), which, in the early days, was at a point near the present intersection of 
North Fourteenth street and Driggs avenue. 

Bushwick was one of the earliest settlements made witliin the present limits of 
Kings County. In order to trace the settlement from the very beginning, it will be 
necessary to refer briefly to conditions on the Continent of Europe in the early part of 
the seventeenth century. 

Religious troubles had divided many countries, and the spirit of intolerance of 
religious freedom drove many from their native lands. In Holland the refugee found 
the greatest liberty, and consequently tliat country became the temporary home of many 
nationalities. 

Among the refugees were a considerable number who had fled from Normandy to 
escape the rigors of religious persecution. When Henry Hudson's report of his voyage 
was made known in Holland, the commercial spirit of the Dutch was kindled and plans 
were advanced to settle the new possessions. The new world opened a field free from 
religious restraints, and so when the first Dutch expeditions started they carried many 
of the refugees. 

At a very early date, the ex.ict date has not been ascertained accurately, a party 
of the refugees left New Amsterdam and sailed up the East River to Bushwick Creek. 
Entering here they made a landing and named tlie stream Normans Kill, by which 
name it is referred to on old maps. No political community was formed at that time, 
each individual squatting on land that his eye fancied ; but for protection against the 
Indians there was naturally a common tendency toward a centre, and that centre was 
afterward the heart of the Town of Bushwick. The exact spot is defined to-day by 
the Old Bushwick Reformed Church, Hnmlioldt and Conselyea streets, which stands 
exactly wdicre the first church building stood. The road leading from Normans Kill 
to the centre of the settlement was the old Woodpoint road. It may have been the 
first road trodden by wdiite men in that section. 

While it is not known exactly when the first settlers landed on the shores of 
Normans Kill, it was probably about i6^?6, and certainly before 1638. On August I, 
1638, Director General Kieft purchased from the Indians for the West India Company 
all the land that was embraced within the old town of Bushwick, and a considerable 
portion of what is now commonly known as the Eastern District. The price paid was 
eight fathoms of duffel cloth, eight fathoms of wampum, eight adzes, twelve kettles, 
eight axes and some knives, corals and awls. 



1 64 

I have treated this point at some length because the point has been raised that 
the West India Company and tlie Governors of New Amsterdam did not have juris- 
diction over outlying settlements. 

Below there is more convincing evidence of Dutch authority. 

After the purchase the settlers took out patents from the Director General for 
the lands on which they had squatted. 

In i6.)o the Hiishwick Chnrcli was erected, facing on the Woodpoint road. Close 
to this edifice, on the same side of Woodpoint road, was the school house, and just 
across the road was the town house. This section was called Het Dorp, or the town 
plot, of Bushwick. 

On March i_|. 1661. Governor Stuyvcsant visited Rushwick. and after he had 
been properly regaled after the manner of the times, was asked to give a name to 
the place. The Governor called it "Boswijck," which meant Town of the Woods. 
Early histories spell tlu' nrune in \arious ways and give different interpretations of 
its meaning, but all a.gree that the place derived its name from the dense woods that 
covered the section. 

In rC/ii the old P.usluvick Churcli and the Town of Buslnvick were incorporated 
by Governor Stuyvesant, and Bushwick became known as one of the five Dutch towns, 
and Governor Stuyvesant issued a patent or ground brief to it. The five Dutch towns 
were Brooklyn, Flatbu.sh, Flatlands, New Utrecht and Bnslnvick. A register was 
especially conmiis,sioned by the Director General, whose duty it was to go to the 
towns and take proof of wills, marria.ge settlements and the like. The five Dutch 
towns had a further community of interest in that they formed one ecclesiastical 
congregation. These facts would seem to effectually dispose of any theory that the 
Director General was without authority in outlying towns. Evidence of such juris- 
diction might be multiplied, but tliat is hardly necessary here. 

The road had an interestin.g history in Revolutionary days, but it is not the 
purpose of this report to do more than establish that the old Woodpoint road was 
a Dutch road. There is no room for reasonable doubt that it was, although often 
referred to in official documents by various names, to wit : "The Road to the Woods," 
1662; Village road, 1663; road to Woodpoint, 1663; road to Normans Kill, 1663. 

Portions of the old Woodpoint road are open to-day and are being used as public 
streets. From Ma.speth avenue to Withers street the road is still in use, and in 
front of the old Bushwick Reformed Church the road is just as open to-day as it was 
two hundred and fifty years ago. 



Department of Finance, Bureau for the Examination of Clain 








r 



OLD rviILL F=?0/KO 




VS/OODROINT ROAD 



^■1 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



014 220 505 1 

















";t< 



.* 
^f..^- 






